STEP 1: Find a person above the age of 65 to interview. They may be related to you. Keep their information confidential by using pseudonyms. Include a short introduction detailing their gender, approximate age, occupational status, and cultural background. Add three of your own original questions. If your interviewee is willing to be recorded for the interview (and they understand their videos will be shared and no longer anonymous), you may include the video or audio recording, although this step is not required.
- Please tell me about your childhood, family and school life.
- Do you consider yourself old? At what age did you notice that you were getting older?
- What is the most important historical event or period of time that you have lived through? How did it influence you personally?
- What is the biggest change you have seen in how people conduct their everyday lives?
- What have been the best years of your life so far? What are your plans for the future?
- How are young people today different from when you were their age?
- Have you ever experienced any negative attitudes or discrimination because of your age?
- <add original question>
- <add original question>
- <add original question>
STEP 2: Post the interview and responses to the discussion forum.
STEP 3: Write a post between 250 and 500 words discussing what you’ve learned from your interview. Were there any answers that surprised you? How do the responses in the interview tie in with or confirm the things you learned about in this module? How do this person’s experiences and attitudes tie in with Erikson’s psychosocial stages? Has this changed your opinion on aging? What are your own personal perceptions on aging?
STEP 4: Return to the discussion to comment on at least ONE other post (in at least FIVE sentences). Expand on a classmate’s post in a value-adding, topic-related way. Promote a collaborative, supportive community, and advance the dialogue through follow-up questions. Reply posts cannot be one-liners, off-topic posts, vague statements, unsupported opinions, inadequate explanations or simply say, “I agree” or “good job.”
| Criteria | Proficient | Developing | Not Evident | Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presents a coherent post between 250-500 words | Writes in clear, descriptive sentences with no or few grammatical errors. The post is well organized and complete, and addresses observations and trends from the interview. | Does not provide enough detail in the post about connections and observations from the interview, or post contains several grammatical errors. | Incomplete post or difficult to understand. | __/10 |
| Shares complete interview of the senior adult | Copies and pastes the entire interview in the discussion board, and it includes two original questions. | Shares a partial interview or does not share enough detail in the interview responses. | Does not include interview or interview includes only yes or no answers. | __/6 |
| Posts at least one reply to the discussion | Posts a value-adding and related comment that contributes to discussion about late adulthood. | Includes a weak or off-topic comment on another post. | Does not post a value-adding and related comment that contributes to discussion about late adulthood. | __/4 |
| Total: | __/20 | |||