Talking Stick - January 2012 - 32

RA Evaluation – Creativity
Subject: ___________________________________ Evaluator Name: ____________________________ Date: ______________________________________

1
Does Not Meet Expectations
Creates programs that interest residents • Consistently falls short of monthly active programming requirements. • Does not create passive programs and/or door tags. • Does not advertise events or programs effectively. • Fails to host regular house meetings. • Has not created CLA or wrote CLA without input from residents. • CLA, if it exists, has not been posted, distributed, or discussed.

2
Sometimes Meets Expectations
• Occasionally falls short of monthly requirements. • Active house programs are hastily planned and/or passive programs/door tags appear rushed or sloppy. • Relies on one form (i.e., flyers only) to advertise programs or information. • House meetings are hosted in “lecture” format. • Majority of the CLA content is generated by the RA. • CLA has not been posted or distributed to residents.

3
Meets Expectations
• Completes active programming requirements in a timely manner. • Completes passive programs and door tags when required. • Utilizes effective advertising to promote events or programs. • Communicates effectively in house meetings. • Created CLA with the house residents. • CLA is prominently posted and/or distributed.

4
Exceeds Expectations
• Hosts a variety of programs to meet diverse needs and interests of residents. • Passive programs and door tags display exceptional planning and effort. • Utilizes multiple forms of advertising to promote events or programs. • Encourages dialogue with and between residents during house meetings. • Facilitated multiple opportunities for residents to contribute to CLA. • Has utilized CLA as a tool to prevent or address issues within the house.

5
Consistently Exceeds Expectations
• Exceeds the number of required monthly programs with a variety of events linked to legitimate learning outcomes. • Uses passive programs and door tags to reinforce house themes or active program topics. • Excels in creating multiple forms of attractive and effective advertising. • Regularly utilizes house meetings as an opportunity to build community. • Has facilitated opportunities for residents to update CLA. • Frequently utilizes CLA to prevent or address issues in the house.

Creative advertising

House meetings

Community Living Agreement

Total: Overall Comments:

Rubrics like the one above deliver direct, objective, and consistent assessment.

simultaneously holding them accountable and positively communicating expectations. At the University of North Carolina at Pembroke, Mike Severy, director of student involvement, uses rubrics to aid in selecting students for their leadership living-learning community, as well as to evaluate the blog entries that students are required to write. He appreciates rubrics because they “garner conversation by quantifying qualitative data,” and they “require you to be involved in the

process throughout.” More specifically, Severy explains that their blog rubric “encourages a reflective piece on leadership from both the students and our staff,” and their selection rubric “encourages a focused and intentional approach.” Severy is not alone in using rubrics for recruitment and selection. Both Brown and Albart also use rubrics to aid in their staff selection process. In fact, after developing their staff performance rubrics, Brown used

32

Talking STick
Talking Stick - January 2012

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Talking Stick - January 2012
