The mutual influence between social domains

This assignment is made by FTRPRF, a Belgian digital publishing company focusing on computational thinking and citizenship1. The learning goals for this teaching assignment/ task are:

1. The students illustrate the mutual influence between social domains (political, social, economic and cultural)

2. Learning goal: The students substantiate their own opinion about social events, themes and trends with reliable information and valid arguments.

3. Learning goal: Students explain modes of representation, participation in power, and democratic decision-making to the extent that they are relevant to their own environment.

Teaching assignment

After a lesson on the different social domains, levels of government and the difference between facts and opinions, the students are given a task as a repetition. With this task, one wants to repeat and evaluate the learning goals. In this task, the intention is that the students look for articles about the different levels of government. In addition, the students are expected to summarize the article, indicate which domains the article is about and give their opinion on the topic in the article based on two arguments.

1. Find an article for each political level (six in total).
2. Summary (answer the five W's: who, what, where, why, when)
3. Which domain(s) are we talking about? Choose from politics, culture, social, economy. Explain why.
4. What is your opinion about the event/problem/decision in the article? Argue with at least two arguments.
5. Write down the source of the article.

Evaluation method

Currently, the evaluation sheet below is given to evaluate students. the students know in advance on which aspects they will be evaluated. In order to organize this evaluation more formatively, the sheet can be transformed on the basis of a number of rubrics that are used to determine where the students are or to give a score. Students can also easily see their evolution when the teacher uses the same rubric again ata subsequent evaluation moment. This can also be used at the end of a trimister or year to see which students have grown and which have continued to reflect on certain skills.

The point that are attained for the evaluation of the task:

• Summary of five W’s: /5
• Domains: /2
• Argumentation of their opinion: /2
• Sources of information: /1
• Total: /10

Feedback: the students write down the following self-reflection:
What did I do well?
What can I do better?

One rubric per highlighted learning goal:


0 1 2
Insufficient mastery Sufficient mastery Full mastery
Student indicates wrong domains with the wrong argumentation. Student indicates wrong domains, but gives correct argumentation Or Student indicates correct domains with the wrong argumentation Student indicates correct domains with the right argumentation


0 1 2 3
Insufficient mastery Sufficient mastery Almost complete mastery Full mastery
Student cannot substantiate their opinion, argumentation does not meet any of the three conditions: *correct *valid *logically constructed. Student can substantiate their opinion weakly, argumentation meets one of the three conditions: *correct *valid *logically constructed. Student can substantiate their opinion well, argumentation meets two of the three conditions: *correct *valid *logically constructed. Student can substantiate their opinion very strongly. Argumentation meets all three conditions: *correct *valid *logically constructed.

Return to our collection of formative assesment practices...!