# data[].attributes.body
CẢm thông- chia sẻ.( cho đi và nhận lại)

# data[].attributes.body
Phạm Bích Thương. Lào cai. Yêu thương nhận lại yêu thương

# data[].attributes.body
I am thankful for my familiy.

# data[].attributes.body
,I  am thankful for my family by Sophia sans

# data[].attributes.body
I am thankful for my family

and my cousins by laidys

# data[].attributes.body
İn the lesson plan that I wil prepare end of the Module While evulating the students either individual  as a team we will use assessment level codes. For example in our events the student's takig over responsibleties is evulated code-2 . Assessment İn solving problem the student's performance will be used code-4.

# data[].attributes.body
Havin studied this module, I feel my Low - Level Collaboration paired reading comprehension activity was Level 1 (Working Together). My high level Collaborative activity was Level 3 /4, dependent on the quality of work produced.

# data[].attributes.body
Collaborative learning is such a usefull method in developing children”s skills and improve learning activities.

# data[].attributes.body
The rubric is very useful. It helps us to reflect on our learning activities, to undrestand collaborative learning better and to assess the levels of student collaboration.
Regarding  the activities I reflected on in Module 1, I came to the following conclusion:
1st activity: students worked together, they shared responsibility but they didn’t make any substantive decision, excepting deciding how to present their work to their peers. I think this learning activity corresponds to a code 3.
2nd activity: in this learning activity, students worked together, they shared responsibility, they made substantive decisions together about the process, the content and the product as well. Since they participated so as to succeed and produced an interdependent product, I think this activity corresponds to a code 5.

# data[].attributes.headline
The rubric seems very useful because it enhances reflection upon the topic and thus  helps prepare better ground for future projects.

# data[].attributes.subject
The rubric seems very useful because it enhances reflection upon the topic and thus  helps prepare better ground for future projects.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of colaboration
Did students work in pairs or groups ? Yes. They have to work in small groups.
Did they share responsibility ? No. Only part of the group actually worked. Rest of the children did not pay attention to the task.

This exercise was on the code 2

High level of colaboration
Did students work in pairs or groups ? Yes. They work in triples.
Did they share responsibility ? Yes. They have to cooperate together to create the story.
Did the childrens make substantive decusions together ? Yes. The group was small so everybody had to participate in task.
Did students work was interdependent? Yes. The result depend on childen cooperation. They make the story together.

This exercise was on the code 5

# data[].attributes.body
I think the rubric turns out to be very useful while planning a collaborative learning activity.  It shows how to plan and guide collaborative work among students.

Low Level of Collaboration Activity: Although the activity I chose was meant to be done in pairs (because there aren't enough computers to do an individual task) I think it is Code 2 or maybe 3 ( in some more challenging questions).

High Level of Collaboration Activity: I think this project is definitely Code 5 because students are required to work in groups, have shared responsibility, make substantive decisions about content, layout and the final product. Their work is interdependent because they have to organise themselves to put all the pieces of the programme together.

# data[].attributes.body
I have not used this type of rubric before. I think that the collaborative work is the future

# data[].attributes.body
I think my low level activixty was a code 2 as students were following instructions and it only required minimial problem solving however they were working in pairs. Rge high level i discussed is a level 5 as it comprises of all componentstalked about in the video. They had to brainstorm, work together, write down their ideas and come to an end descision. After that they then had to share their ideas with the class.

# data[].attributes.body
Learning activity 1:
Code 3 – Low level collaboration.
This activity requires working together, sharing responsibilities but without making substantive decisions together.          Learning activity 2:
Code 5 – High level collaboration.
This activity requires to plan the work, select information, research and discuss the subjet and work interdependently.

# data[].attributes.headline
Małgorzata, Poland The rubric helped me focus on the 3 elements of CL. My "low CL" activity was definitely code 1. I've realised that my described "high levl of CL" activity included shared responsibility and interdependence (seemingly code 5), but that the aspect making important decisions wasn't clear. The rubric helps to evaluate and improve activities. But there is a rpoblem with the scale, becaue like in my example level 5 is reached without level 4 - shared important decisions are not a prerequisite for interdependence. I'd rather use the rubric as aspects to look at, not as a scale.

# data[].attributes.subject
Małgorzata, Poland The rubric helped me focus on the 3 elements of CL. My "low CL" activity was definitely code 1. I've realised that my described "high levl of CL" activity included shared responsibility and interdependence (seemingly code 5), but that the aspect making important decisions wasn't clear. The rubric helps to evaluate and improve activities. But there is a rpoblem with the scale, becaue like in my example level 5 is reached without level 4 - shared important decisions are not a prerequisite for interdependence. I'd rather use the rubric as aspects to look at, not as a scale.

# data[].attributes.body
More clearly see where changes should be introduced

# data[].attributes.body
I think my low level activity is a code 1, because students only had to follow instructions. My high level activity is a code 5 because first, they had to think about the menu for the day, and then, they cooked together, all the classroom, sharing tasks.

# data[].attributes.body
I think my low level activity corresponds to a code 2 and my high level activity is code 4. In the first activity the students only work in pairs and they don't take decisions. In the second activity, students work together, in group and despite they don't have to take all the decisions, they collaborate effectively.

# data[].attributes.body
I think my Low Level activity corresponds to code 2, for collaborative work was carried out in pairs and both were responsible. In High Level I think has to be coded at 4-5. The group come together and they made presentations in Literature Class. They wrote their researches/reflections by exposing their work with other groups.

# data[].attributes.headline
Mariana Tomás, Portugal                              

# data[].attributes.subject
Mariana Tomás, Portugal                              

# data[].attributes.body
Two learning activities:
Activities for using magazines in the classroom
Magazines are a rich source of authentic materials and can be very motivating and inspire a wide range of activities.
You can bring whole magazines to class to stimulate interest in portuguese culture, to introduce the topic of media and language or just to help students get to grips with handling a whole publication in portuguese. If possible, it's good to use copies of teen magazines or language magazines. Here are some ideas and tips to help you get the best from them.

The cover

Use the cover image to brainstorm words associated with the picture (and probable topics to be found in the magazine).

Look at the headlines on the cover to predict the main topics featured inside. Ask: Which would you read first? For higher levels: What types of words are used to make you want to read?

Choose the best cover from a selection of 4 magazines. Hold a class vote. Which cover do you like best? Why? For higher levels: What makes a good cover?

Using a whole magazine

Set a time limit for these tasks to encourage students to skim through the publications.

Ask students in pairs to skim through their magazine and list the types of topics covered. Encourage use of headlines and pictures to guess topic types. Compare their topic list with the contents page.

Write the key headlines from all main feature articles on the board and dictate a list of topics or themes. Ask students to match the topics to the headlines on the board. Then check using the magazine.

This activity requires a low level of collaboration from students but improves the contact to an informative writing with discussion on some subjets.

Active listening activities

Learning to listen to each other more carefully can build their ability. The following activities are a fun way of getting students to concentrate more , to remember information and to learn to get together.

Dual dictation
Ask students to get into a groupe of four students. When student 1 is speaking, student 2, 3 and 4 should write down what they are saying and vice versa. When they have finished the conversation, they should check what each other has written about the questions and put the  information together. You could then ask students 1, 2, 3 or 4 to ask the question in fornt of the class, or to swap with other pairs.
At the end, the students make a reflexion about the contribution os each member in the performance  of the groupe.

This activity is excelent,it requires a high level of collaboration from students.

# data[].attributes.body
Activity 1 - Low level
- Do students need to work in pairs? Yes, to select the most important information and to help one another.
- Do they have shared responsibility? Yes. The success of the job depends on par.
- Do they make substantive decisions? Do not.
Level 3

Activity 2 - High level
- Do students need to work in pairs? Yes.
- Do they have shared responsibility? Yes.
- Do they make substantive decisions? Yes.
- Is your work interdependent? Yes.
Level 5

# data[].attributes.body
Genova Italy
LOW LEVEL : work in pair in order to read  a story in their class book (giving intonation, pronunciation, rythm...) they help together to read better , to read fast...and then they played the stoy aloud. The students share knowledge, give each other feedback and they are helping, but in the end, each students plays his part .

They don’t discuss

Are they working together ? Yes

Do they have shared responsibility ? In a part yes , but they shared knowledge

Do they  make substantial decisions ? Not at all. They decide when they are ready to read aloud.

Is their work interdipendent ? Not at all.

In this activity they reach level 2/3

HIGH LEVEL : in an Etwinning project they have to write a rap about school in group and they have to decide what they want to say, how they can say it and respect the rap rythm.

Level 4

Are they working together ? Yes

Do they have shared responsibility ?yes

Do they  make substantial decisions ? yes about the product and also the process.

Is their work interdipendent ?Yes because we prepare a rap, first in pairs and then in small groups and at the end we decide about the class rap.

I think I’m beginning to understand something in order to assess collaboraative working, but it’s a long way  !

# data[].attributes.body
During the first task, students would be at Level 2: they would only share “the document”, without having to take any responsibility in the documents reading. If it was necessary to share an opinion about gathered information, they would be on Level 3.

Whereas on second proposed task, students would be at Levels 4 to 5, as the separated residues would need to be separated and placed in different recipients. This implies the students would need to discuss and agree on which is the proper and most sustainable recipient to place the residues.

# data[].attributes.body
Activity 1: the activities described reach levels 2 or maximum 3. Activity 2: they  reach levels 4 or 5. As Deirdre said, it is important to have evidence that these levels are attained. While designing our projects, we should introduce steps, formative evaluation, checklists, etc showing that students are making substantive decisions and working interdependently.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of collaboration
Activity 1: Vocabulary List: A small group discusses the meaning of the words, they share their knowledge, and they give each other feedback.  There is no shared responsibility because students give each other feedback and they are helping, but in the end, each students owns his list, and sends this list to the educator for feedback.  (code 2)

High level of collaboration.

Activity 2: presentation Retail Software: they work together, they have shared responsibility because they develop a common presentation that they collectively own and they are mutually responsible for the outcome. Students make also substantive decisions together about the content (which retail software, functionalities, analysing, …), about the process (who will look up which info and where) and about the product (design of the presentation, the presentation).  They are conducting a research about retail software, they decide on the roles and the plan and they decide on how to shape the presentation. Their work is also interdependent. The participation is structured: each student is doing a different internship where they get the info about the retail software. (content). Everyone creates a different piece of the overall presentation. (Code5) � Vɒ ��Д��

# data[].attributes.body
For me, I consider levels 1 and 2 low levels of collaboration, students do not collaborate, do not share knowledge, nor responsibility. At level 3, I consider a level of collaboration, students already work in group, share responsibility, but decisions They are not in a group.
At levels 4 and 5, students work in groups, share responsibility and decisions, and produce independent work, and we are faced with high levels of collaboration.

# data[].attributes.body
My first lesson plan is in code 1,as it.doesnt contain really group work.the second one is in code 5.because it gives opportunity for paired group.work,shared responsibility,substansive decisions and interdepence.
Rubric is very useful to decide your learning activity is collaborative or not.I will use it in my lessons plans based on collaborative learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of collaboration activity.

Code 2: In this activity (worksheet) students do work together, but they do not have shared responsibility.

High level of collaboration activity.

Code 5: Students do have shared responsibility and they do make substantive decisions together about the content, process, or product of their work and their work is interdependent. During this activity they have to solve some problems. They have to agree the roles and to discuss the ideas for their short scene and next present it to the whole class.

The rubric helped me to understand collaborative learning better, it is very clear and useful for me. It will help me to check and improve the level of collaboration in activities for students.

# data[].attributes.body
Frankly speaking, my low level activity 1 -  should have code 1- it does not need collaboration but only individual work (creating descriptions based on word clouds).
Whereas, high level activity - code 4 - when they need share responsibilities to make common outcome (poster preapared by international team) .
All in all, The rubric seems to be very helpful in understanding collaborative learning better. Making substantive decisions together will be useful for students in their future challenges.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose the role-play activity as a lower level -code 2; and the project as higher level-code 4.

# data[].attributes.body
The low level activity is level one as they are sharing their ideas in a small group and they are not leaving the group.

The high level activity is level 5 as everyone has a role in the group. The group then shares their data with the class and every groups data is taken into consideration. Their is a whole class discussion among the groups.

# data[].attributes.headline
Elisabete Gouveia, Portugal            Learning activity 1 – code 3 – Low level collaborationThis activity requires working together, sharing responsabilities but without making substantive decisions together.                          Learning activity 2 – code 5 – High level collaborationThis activity requires to plan the work, select information, research and discuss the subjet, make substantive decisions and work interdependently. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Elisabete Gouveia, Portugal            Learning activity 1 – code 3 – Low level collaborationThis activity requires working together, sharing responsabilities but without making substantive decisions together.                          Learning activity 2 – code 5 – High level collaborationThis activity requires to plan the work, select information, research and discuss the subjet, make substantive decisions and work interdependently. 

# data[].attributes.body
My first activity scored 2 with the rubric and the second 4. I think that a rubric score 1 or 2 indicates a low level activity and a rubric score 4 or 5 a high level activity. I think that rubrics are not just helpful for categorizing a  project but necessary for assessing  it.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the use of codes is very useful for implementing, structuring and evaluating a collaborative work.
Code 1 means that students work alone.
Code 2 means that they can work together but do not share responsibilities.
Code 3 means that students work in groups, share responsibilities but do not make decisions together.
Code 4 means that students work in groups, share responsibilities, make decisions together, but their work is not independent.
Code 5 means that students work in groups, share responsibilities, make decisions together, and work independently.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading the collaboration decision steps my low level activity results level 2. The high level one results level 4.
I think the rubric is very useful in  organizing collaborative activity . Using it in the design part of the activity I can realize a better lesson plan that is really collaborative. In the future I'll use them in the design part of the lesson.

# data[].attributes.body
Activity 1: the activities described reach levels 2 or maximum 3. Activity 2: they reach levels 4 or 5. As Deirdre said, it is important to have evidence that these levels are attained. While designing our projects, we should introduce steps, formative evaluation, checklists, etc showing that students are making substantive decisions and working interdependently.

# data[].attributes.body
I consider the rubric very useful as atool for  collaborative activity.

Levels 1 and 2 are low level activity: students don't colaborate and they dont't have shared responsability.

Levels 4 and 5 are high level activity: students must work in colaboration in their tasks and researches and present theis work to class.

# data[].attributes.body
I use 21 CLD and I checked my activity examples:
Activity 1- level 3, because the students work in group, they shared responsability but they don't made substantive decisions.
Activity 2- level 5. In this activity the students work together, they need shared responsability, and make substantive decisions because problems arose during their activity and they supported themselves in solving their problems to construct the final product.

# data[].attributes.body
Now I realize that my higher level of collaboration activity corresponds to level 4 which is not as good as I thought. My low level collaboration activity is at level 2. From now on, I will definetly think of the rubric when it comes to this kind of activities.

# data[].attributes.body
After using 21CLD framework and rubric I conclude that the activity I planned with a low level of collaboration corresponds to level 3 since the students do work together, do have shared responsibility but they are not required to make substantive decisions together. With regard to the activity I planned with a high level of collaboration, I conclude that corresponds to level 5 once students do have shared responsibility, do make substantive decisions together about the content, the process and the product of their work, and their work is interdependent.

# data[].attributes.body
after reading the 21 CLD framework my "low level collaboration" activity corresponds to level 2, as I expected, while the "high level collaboration" one corresponds to level 5 since the success of the activity rely on the constant shared responsibility and negotiation of ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of collaboration corresponds to level 3 since the students do work together and have shared responsibility, and work it´s interdependent  in the answers they provide;

In the activity proposed for high level of collaboration it corresponds to level 5, because students have to make important decisions and share their objectivity about the formation of the group, the choice of the way forward to solve the problem proposed, the form of presentation of the final product and the final conclusion.

# data[].attributes.body
Modulo 1
Learning activity that requires low level of collaboration among students: do a presentation of a colleague, for example, someone ask about personal identification, hobbies, favourite singer, etc. Then do the presentation with the information asked.

21 CLD Rubric
The 4 Collaboration Questions:

1. Are they working together? Yes

2. Do they have shared responsibility? Not completely

3. Are they making substantive decisions? No

4. Is their work interdependent? No

Code 1

Modulo 1
Activities with high level of collaboration between students:
made a creative fairytale in group (3-4 elements), for example, reinvent a version of "Snow white and the Seven Dwarfs". The students discuss the narrative elements and decide to change the characteristics of characters, places, time, etc, made the transformation of original text, built new text,  make a oral presentation at class, publish and share it at social networks.

21 CLD Rubric
The 4 Collaboration Questions:

1. Are they working together? Yes

2. Do they have shared responsibility? Yes

3. Are they making substantive decisions? Yes

4. Is their work interdependent? Yes

Code 5

# data[].attributes.body
The activity described in module 1 as low level of collaboration, applying the issues related to 21CLD, I consider it level 3 since the students work in groups and have shared responsibility in the type of work they develop and product quality .
The activity considered as a high level of collaboration reaches level 5, because the students work in groups, sharing responsibility for all the work developed (process and product), make substantive decisions and all their work is interdependent.

# data[].attributes.headline
Noura ben AlayaLow level of collaboration : Following the 21 CLD rubric to evaluate my activities, I realized that for the low level of collaboration, i just have node 1. Because students don’t have shared responsabilities, nor do they do decisionsFor the second project , High level of collaboration :Construct a magazine of the class which contains different rubriques, I have reached node 5 that is all steps are respected 

# data[].attributes.subject
Noura ben AlayaLow level of collaboration : Following the 21 CLD rubric to evaluate my activities, I realized that for the low level of collaboration, i just have node 1. Because students don’t have shared responsabilities, nor do they do decisionsFor the second project , High level of collaboration :Construct a magazine of the class which contains different rubriques, I have reached node 5 that is all steps are respected 

# data[].attributes.body
Learning activity that requires low level of collaboration among students:

# data[].attributes.body
Cristina CCruz,Portugal

Learning activity that requires low level of collaboration among students:
Teacher plans the orientation of the group work, is the traditional method. The production of texts is a task where the degree of interaction between the group member is low.

Learning activity that requires high level of collaboration among students:
All the class develop a unique project.
Students have to plan the work, Recherche, select, discuss, investigate, agree, make decisions and shows/projection,using the 21 CLD rubric  and the code is the 5.

# data[].attributes.body
When I used the 21CLD rubric, I noticed that in the low level collaborative activity it is in code 1, because everything that happens in the activity is directed by the teacher; In the activity of high level of collaboration the code is 5. This rubric for me is very useful and simple. I was a fan!

# data[].attributes.body
The 4 Collaboration Questions:

1. Are they working together? Yes

2. Do they have shared responsibility?

not completely

3. Are they making substantive decisionsYes

4. Is their work interdependent?Yes

# data[].attributes.body
So, for activity Find someone who... there is only the first stage of rubrics - learners needed to work in pairs and exchange information. Maybe, learners share the responsibility, because for completing the task they should provide the dialog and figure out some facts about each other. For the Describing a newspaper/magazine learners need to work in the groups for achieving the single goal, they share responsibility. Pupils have joint responsibility for describing their item. Learners make a substantive decision because they should prepare the presentation of a newspaper/magazine,so they need to decide what and how they would present. Pupils work interdepend because each of them should create a different piece of the overall description.

# data[].attributes.body
When using the 21 CLD rubric to evaluate my projects, I realized that for one of the proposed activities I just reached code 3 as the students didn't make substantial decisions, but where waiting for my indications. I got an high level of collaboration with younger students,as I let they produced their own videos working in at interdependent way and deciding what content and style to present.

# data[].attributes.body
Using the 21CLD rubric, my low level of collaboration activity could be stablished as level 1 because students didn't work together. Regarding my high level activity, it could be scored as 5 since students, in small group of 4-5 have to work together, share responsibilities, making decisions together and their work must be interdependent, which lead me to think that my notion of low and high level activities are aligned with this rubric :)

# data[].attributes.body
After revising my learning activities against the 21CLD framework and rubric I've found that:

the activity planned with a low-level of collaboration corresponds to level 3 since the students do work together and have shared responsibility in the answers they provide;

the activity planned with a high-level of collaboration corresponds to level 5 since it requires the students to make substantive decisions about and to share responsibility for the product of their work - the presentation to their classmates.

In revising the high-level activity against the rubric, it became very clear that in order for the students' work to be interdependent it is very important the way the teacher plans the distribution of work and its interdependency.

# data[].attributes.body
I've checked the activities I've described earlier and here's my evaluation:
In the first activity (Low level) -
1 - Students were required to work together YES
2 - Have students shared responsibilities?
NOT ALL STUDENTS
3 - Have students made substantive decisions together? YES
4- Was their work interdependent ?
NOT COMPLETELY
In the second activity -  (High level)
1 - Students were required to work together YES
2 - Have students shared responsibilities?
YES. ALL OF THEM HAD TO CARRY OUT TASKS TOGETHER.
3 - Have students made substantive decisions together? YES
4- Was their work interdependent ?
THEY NEEDED INTERACTION TO CARRY OUT THEIR TASKS.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level collaboration activity: Brainstorming as a group in a padlet: Level 1
Explanation: The members of the group collect criterias for a good tutorial movie under the moderation of the teacher.
High level collaboration activity: The small groups have to create a product: Level 5
Explanation: Before the video gets produced, the group has to present a plan and a storyboard. The whole prozess is documented in a portfolio where the roles and responsibilities are explained.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of collaboration:
Students work together with worksheet using internet and schoolbook they try to complete it. - I see here the 2 step of collaboration.
High level of collaboration:
Students observe clouds and cloudiness in 3 months period of time. They have to decide about clouds type and degree of cloudiness. Then analyze their researches, drwa results and present them. - I see here the 5 step of collaboration.

# data[].attributes.body
I have been glad to  learn that the activity I spoke about in module 1 can be really defined " high level" of collaboration even if , so far I hadn't analized all the different parts of the work:
group work/ shared responsibility/substantial decisions/interdependent work. It will be very useful , in future, to follow the rubric , in particular when there is a project to work on and where cooperation is essential.

# data[].attributes.body
I realized how important it is to prepare the activity and analyse whether it will be, in fact, collaborative work. It is fundamental to give objectiv instructions to the students in such a way that we make sure that the five questions are attended.

In the first activity (considered poor ) -
1 - Students were required to work together YES
2 - Some students did work together others were working independently
They DO NOT have shared responsibility
3 - Students were working in pairs
But few decisions had to be made together about the content, or the process, only the final product needed to be the same.

In the second activity - writing stories in pairs (7 year old children)-  Level 5

Are they working together? YES
They discuss ideas together, to build a plan for the story, and they need to write them down.
Is this shared responsibility? YES
All children give ideias and are strongly implied in this type of work. They want o build a good story bacause it will be presented to the rest of the class.
Are they making substative decisions? YES
Writing is a task that implies many different skills at the same time since there are many different items to attend to (sentence building, chosing good vacabulary, organizing ideas and connect them, spelling, punctuation marks,...). They strongly need each other.
Is the work interdependent? YES
All the texts they write are present to the rest of the class. Their peers give their opinion about the final product, as well as the process and the way they managed to organize the work together.

in my learning diary:
https://padlet.com/jonipt/nc7lp9iovbwo

# data[].attributes.body
1. Low level collaboration activity.

·         Pupils interview each other to make a list of favorite sport games (Level 2)

2. High level collaboration activity.

·         In groups of five children should create a movie,

·         Web-Quest on different themes.

·         eTwinning space.(All the activities - 5)

# data[].attributes.body
The activity which required a low level of collaboration from students wasto work together to answer a questionnaire on the already known (crossword and quiz). They worked in pairs to develop a common response.
The score of the activity is 3 : they worked together and they shared responsability.
The activity wich required a high level of collaboration : pupils were invited to draw on mythological heroes to create a contemporary hero who will try to solve a problem of the modern world.Separated into groups according to their choice of hero and problem, they have been invited  to prepare a debate, then to imagine the adventures of their heroes, illustrate their narratives and finally create a digital archive for broadcast production.
The score of the activity is 5 : they worked together, they shared responsability, they made substantive decisions together and their work is interdependent.
The rubric helped me to better understand collaborative learning. However, the use of the rubric did not change my opinion on the activities mentioned in module 1. What is useful on the heading is that it helps us to identify quickly and more surely the level of collaboration of an activity. I plan to use it in my daily classroom practice.

# data[].attributes.body
Using the rubric1st activity: a student exposing infrmation to his colleagues - Level 1.
2nd activity: discussing diferent resolutions for a math problem - Level 4.

# data[].attributes.body
Using the  rubric didn't  change my mind  about the reflexion I made in module 1.
As I will explain in my learning diary, one of the activities required a higher level than the other. But this rubric will help me to assess it more specifically.

# data[].attributes.body
The first activity in low level is represented by code 1 and 2 because the children don't collaborate and they don't share responsibility.

# data[].attributes.body
The 4 Collaboration Questions:

1. Are they working together?

2. Do they have shared responsibility?

3. Are they making substantive decisions?

4. Is their work interdependent?
According the  21CLD framework and rubric I found that:
1) the first activity corresponds to level 2 since the students do work together but they haven't shared responsability.
2) the second activiety
corresponds to level 5.

# data[].attributes.body
After revising my learning activities against the 21CLD framework and rubric I found that:

the activity planned with a low-level of collaboration corresponds to level 3 since the students do work together and have shared responsibility in the answers they provide;

the activity planned with a high-level of collaboration corresponds to level 5 since it requires the students to make substantive decisions about and to share responsibility for the product of their work - the presentation to their classmates.

In revising the high-level activity against the rubric, it became very clear that in order for the students' work to be interdependent it is very important the way the teacher plans the distribution of work and its interdependency.

# data[].attributes.body
The rubric makes you think about the different levels of collaboration you want, or nedd, for a diifferent task or its intended outcome. Level 1 would be more of an individual work with sharing answers, as 4 or 5 would certainly be shared responsability and important decisions made together.

# data[].attributes.body
The 4 Collaboration Questions:

1. Are they working together?

2. Do they have shared responsibility?

3. Are they making substantive decisions?

4. Is their work interdependent?

Answering the Questions by taking the activities:
A. First activity
1. Are they working together?
Students work together: in pairs or groups

2. Do they have shared responsibility?

Students have shared responsibility: in a high level to achieve the goals and have a final product

3. Are they making substantive decisions?

Students make substantive decisions together: they managed important issues (content and product)

4. Is their work interdependent?

Students’ work is interdependent: they produced an interdependent product

Conclusion: this learning activity required high levels of collaboration

B. Second activity
The 4 Collaboration questions were helpful questions. They allowed me to conclude that this activity is not the most appropriate on producing collaboration skills to students.
Conclusion: This activity required low levels of collaboration 8

# data[].attributes.body
I did not change my opinion about the low level of students' collaboration, when I gave the example "students do oriented tasks", i reach the conclusion that, using the rubric, the activity corresponds to level 2. But, about the high level of collaboration between the students , i now know that my description was very restricted because when students do group work and decide who they work with, it is not enough to define a high level of collaboration. So rubric is very usefull to define what is hight level of activities' colaboration aon i intend to use it in my future colaboration activities.

# data[].attributes.body
I think my

# data[].attributes.body
I liked very much this useful tool helped me learn how to design my lessons

# data[].attributes.body
Ther rubric is a useful tool to implemet a collaborative activity. Low level activity represents 1-2 code where students do not work together and they do not share responsibility. High level activity represents 4-5 code where students work together doing reserches and then they present their project to the class

# data[].attributes.body
The first activity that I have described is level 3:the  students work together during the brainstorming, when every student presents to the schoolmates the deepened argument and he verify their learning. In this group work the final evaluation for each student is based on the theme assigned to the group, then each student shares the responsibility to teach, effectively, what he has studied  at all the members of his group.
The second activity that I have described is level 5: students work together, share responsibility for the final product and  take substantive decisions regarding the type of educational game to be created, the material to be used, its look and feel, the number of stages to be included in the path, the game rules to be established.

In the groups there was a interdependence because each member shares his knowledge of the topic and practical skills to the entire group by creating a part of the educational game that fits like the pieces of a puzzle.

# data[].attributes.body
Vila Nova de Cerveira - Portugal
Considering the 21 CLD framework and rubric, the activity considered low leve is positioned at level 3, the high activity is at level 5.
I think my little collaboration activity corresponds to code 3, because students:
A) Work as group;
B) Share responsability;
C) Do not make substantive decisions;
D) Do not work has interdependence.
The high collaboration activity is code 5, because students:
A) Work as group;
B) Share responsability;
C) Make substantive decisions;
D) Work has interdependence.
Google translation.

# data[].attributes.body
Considering the 21CLD framework and rubric, the activity considered as low level is positioned at level 2; the high level activity is at level 5.

# data[].attributes.body
The rubrics helped me realize that planning the collaborative work could be more effective and always a job well done if I assess my plans before I proceed with it in class.
I will from now on assess my plan first, using this rubric.

# data[].attributes.body
Make decisions and chair responsibility are essential to a high collaborative work.

# data[].attributes.body
I intend to use it in the future  the rubric becouse it can me help and understand collaborative learning better.

# data[].attributes.body
Students work in groups, share responsibility, make substantive decisions together and their work is interdependent since they have to make a final presentation to the class.

# data[].attributes.body
Low level of collaboration:

Students get to perform tasks at home using different applications online: Padlet, youtube, google ..To describe the tasks and save the lesson file used the onenote.(Level 1)

High level of collaboration:

In the next lesson we will discuss the tasks.

During class, students work in groups or in pairs to exercise, find resources, record observations and present online the result of the work done using the padlet.
(Level 5)

# data[].attributes.body
The low level collaboration - code 1. Students work in pairs but they do not share responsibility.
The high level of collaboration - code 5. Students work in groups, share responsibility, make substantive decisions together and their work is interdependent since they have to make a final presentation to the class.

# data[].attributes.body
The first activity I described was a code 2: students worked together but they did not really share responsibility and they did not have to take any substantive decision together.
The secondo activity I described (Jigsaw + Number Heads Together) was a code 5: students had to work together, they shared responsibility and they had to take substantive decisions about the content of the text; moreoever they developed a positive interdependence in two ways: 1. in the jigsaw each member depended on the other in order to understand the whole text (each member had a different part of the text); 2. each member had to share his or her knowledge in order to take part in the Number Heads Together game and to get the score as a group.

# data[].attributes.body
Below is the brief analysis of High Level Collaboration Learning Activity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mind Map Free - Free Mind Mapping Software | MindMeister

# data[].attributes.body
Below is the brief analysis of Low Level Collaboration Learning activity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mind Map Free - Free Mind Mapping Software | MindMeister

# data[].attributes.body
I try to be more clear with this table

# data[].attributes.body
This rubric is very useful and effective. It made us understand clearly what collaborative work is.

# data[].attributes.body
https://padlet.com/joanaconceicao/h92iqnc8ahwp

# data[].attributes.body
I checked the activities introduced in Mod.1 and I think that they are well planned (group work- tasks) so the rubric don't change my mind about how I planned it but I should use it to observe students working and reflect on how they behave and collaborate effectively. I would use it to observe and rearrange the planned activities and classroom management if they don't collaborate

# data[].attributes.body
I've divided my two collaboration activities through the makers of the 21CLD Rubrics in this manner, so Ive could analyse ech level reached

| marker | Low collaboration activity | High collaboration activity
|
| creating some groups and propose them some activities like exsercises of countability or draft a Balance Sheet and so on | creation of a virtual firm
| Collaboration decision | Level 2: students do work together | Level 4, thy work together, sharing responsability and making substantive decisions
| Knowledge costruction | Level 1:students can complete the activity by using familiar procedures without construction knowledge  | Level 5 students contruct their knowledge,apply it in a new context and have a interdisciplinary view
| Real-world problem-Solving and innovation | Level 1: students use a previously learned procedure for most of the work | Level 4 student have to effort real-world prolem and try to innovate their process or outcome
| Use of ICT for learning | Level 2: student use excel to reproduce contents | Level 4 use ICT is required for contruction their knowledge
| Self-regulation  | Level 1: Pre-requiaite for self-regulation ar non in place | Level 3 studentsactivty is long term and have learning goals and associated success criteria
| Skilled comunication | Levle 1: studentsarenotrequired to produce extended comunication | Level 4 student have to produce multi-modal comuncation also providing evidence to their thesis

I

# data[].attributes.body
I still think that the  Community is a level 5 activity because each part of the work in intertwined to get to the final product and it have every scenario possible because students start point is their likes and interests toward a part of the community and they become immersed in the investigative process and in the campaign, in the other activity I did notice that sometimes my students collaboration was more limited and that in fact in some activities they work in group but as individuals and in the collaborative test the just engage in just the information sharing and discussion. in the second activity it was classified as low level but as I went to analyze this models it is more engaging that I though because it envolved planning and presentation and engagement from each members ideas and perspectives. This module has certainly help me to value and understand better the basic and fundamental builds of what collaborative teaching is all about and distinguish the levels and multiple scenarios of this type of approach and although I have been using this method for a long time it is know that I am starting to understand the skeleton that serve as the base for each activity, the concept is now getting shaped. I will be using this knowledge to refine my technique and made a just value of the dinamics that are going to be observe and measure, so this way the activities will be more organized and  resulted oriented.

# data[].attributes.body
My low level activity should have code 1 because the students are not doing the same job or aiming to get the same answer. For high level activity, code 3 should be used because students are working together and sharing responsibilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Has using the rubric I don´t change my mind about the activities I wrote about in module one. ​The rubric confirmed the evaluation of the level of collaboration of the activity I had done previously.

This rubric is very simple, clear and effective and therefore can easily be taken into account in the evaluation of collaborative learning activities. The rubric can help us to understand the type and quality of collaboration taking place in the learning activities we design and can act as a guide when we are planning a collaborative learning activity.

I really appreciated the very practical nature of the item, its applicability and functionality . So I will use it in the future.

My Learning Diary: https://tackk.com/r3apqn