Clinical Field Experience C: Evaluating Campus Operations
Clinical Field Experience C: Evaluating Campus Operations - Rubric
Safety and Welfare of Students and Sta� 6 points
Criteria Description
Safety and Welfare of Students and Staff
5. Target 6 points
Reflection comprehensively discusses observations and solutions regarding safety
and welfare of students and staff.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Reflection concisely discusses observations and solutions regarding safety and
welfare of students and staff.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Reflection minimally discusses observations and solutions regarding safety and
welfare of students and staff.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Reflection fails to adequately discuss observations and solutions regarding safety
and welfare of students and staff.
Allocation of Resources 6 points
Criteria Description
Allocation of Resources
5. Target 6 points
Reflection realistically and thoroughly discusses the allocation of resources.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Reflection clearly and relevantly discusses the allocation of resources.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Reflection vaguely discusses the allocation of resources.
Collapse All
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Reflection unrealistically discusses the allocation of resources.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Procedures to Monitor and Manage Operations 6 points
Criteria Description
Procedures to Monitor and Manage Operations
5. Target 6 points
Reflection expertly discusses procedures used to monitor and manage operations.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Reflection competently discusses procedures used to monitor and manage
operations.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Reflection partially discusses procedures used to monitor and manage operations.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Reflection incomprehensively discusses procedures used to monitor and manage
operations.
1. No Submission 0 points
PSEL Standards 7 and 10 and Implications for Future Practice 6 points
Criteria Description
PSEL Standards 7 and 10 and Implications for Future Practice
5. Target 6 points
Reflection proficiently discusses implications for application as a future practitioner.
Elements of PSEL Standards 7 and 10 are expertly incorporated into reflection.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Reflection logically discusses implications for application as a future practitioner.
Elements of PSEL Standards 7 and 10 are accurately incorporated into reflection.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Reflection inexplicitly discusses implications for application as a future practitioner.
Elements of PSEL Standards 7 and 10 are weakly addressed.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Reflection unrealistically discusses implications for application as a future
practitioner. Elements of PSEL Standards 7 and 10 are inaccurately addressed.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Organization 3 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 3 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the
required word count.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is
within a reasonable range of the required word count.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with
a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the
required word count.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the
summary is widely outside of the required word count.
Mechanics of Writing 3 points
Criteria Description
includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use
5. Target 3 points
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-
developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are
varied and engaging.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder
comprehension. Variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some
practice and content-related language.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent
language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Total 30 points