Utilizing Assessment and Instructional Strategies for Language and Content Instruction (TESOL Class)

TSL558week3rubric.pdf

Home >Education homework help >Utilizing Assessment and Instructional Strategies for Language and Content Instruction (TESOL Class)

Utilizing Assessment and Instructional Strategies for Language and Content Instruction - Rubric

Assessment Outcomes and Results 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Assessment Outcomes and Results

5. Target 9.6 points

How to use outcomes from a variety of assessment types for assessing ELLs to guide language and content instruction is

convincing. An explanation of how assessment results from English language proficiency assessments and standardized

tests can guide instruction is in-depth.

4. Acceptable 8.35 points

How to use outcomes from a variety of assessment types for assessing ELLs to guide language and content instruction is

credible. An explanation of how assessment results from English language proficiency assessments and standardized tests

can guide instruction is detailed.

3. Approaching 7.1 points

How to use outcomes from a variety of assessment types for assessing ELLs to guide language and content instruction is

overly simplistic. An explanation of how assessment results from English language proficiency assessments and

standardized tests can guide instruction is lacking detail or minimally included.

2. Insufficient 6.62 points

How to use outcomes from a variety of assessment types for assessing ELLs to guide language and content instruction is

unfitting. An explanation of how assessment results from English language proficiency assessments and standardized tests

can guide instruction is unconvincing or not included.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Di�erentiated Instruction for Language Domains 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Differentiated Instruction for Language Domains

5. Target 9.6 points

Provides compelling examples of differentiated instruction for each language domain. Convincingly includes why they are

effective according to research.

4. Acceptable 8.35 points

Provides noteworthy examples of differentiated instruction for each language domain. Reasonably includes why they are

effective according to research.

3. Approaching 7.1 points

Provides weak examples of differentiated instruction for each language domain. Vaguely includes why they are effective

according to research.

2. Insufficient 6.62 points

Provides flawed examples of differentiated instruction for each language domain. Unconvincingly includes why they are

effective according to research.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Di�erentiated Instructional Strategies for Content Areas 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Differentiated Instructional Strategies for Content Areas

5. Target 9.6 points

Provides compelling differentiated instructional strategies teachers can utilize in content areas. Convincingly includes why

they are effective according to research.

4. Acceptable 8.35 points

Provides noteworthy differentiated instructional strategies teachers can utilize in content areas. Reasonably includes why

they are effective according to research.

3. Approaching 7.1 points

Provides weak differentiated instructional strategies teachers can utilize in content areas. Vaguely includes why they are

effective according to research.

2. Insufficient 6.62 points

Provides flawed differentiated instructional strategies teachers can utilize in content areas. Unconvincingly includes why

they are effective according to research.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Formative Assessment Strategies for Language Development 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Formative Assessment Strategies for Language Development

5. Target 9.6 points

Provides compelling formative assessment strategies for language development which can be differentiated for ELLs and

used for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Convincingly includes

why they are effective according to research.

4. Acceptable 8.35 points

Provides noteworthy formative assessment strategies for language development which can be differentiated for ELLs and

used for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Reasonably includes

why they are effective according to research.

3. Approaching 7.1 points

Provides weak formative assessment strategies for language development which can be differentiated for ELLs and used

for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Vaguely includes why they

are effective according to research.

2. Insufficient 6.62 points

Provides flawed formative assessment strategies for language development which can be differentiated for ELLs and used

for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Unconvincingly includes why

they are effective according to research.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Formative Assessment Strategies for Content Knowledge 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Formative Assessment Strategies for Content Knowledge

5. Target 9.6 points

Provides compelling formative assessment strategies for content knowledge which can be differentiated for ELLs and used

for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Convincingly includes why

these are effective according to research.

4. Acceptable 8.35 points

Provides noteworthy formative assessment strategies for content knowledge which can be differentiated for ELLs and used

for monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Reasonably includes why

these are effective according to research.

3. Approaching 7.1 points

Provides weak formative assessment strategies for content knowledge which can be differentiated for ELLs and used for

monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Vaguely includes why these are

effective according to research.

2. Insufficient 6.62 points

Provides flawed formative assessment strategies for content knowledge which can be differentiated for ELLs and used for

monitoring student growth and the planning of future differentiated learning experiences. Unconvincingly includes why

these are effective according to research.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Language Use and Audience Awareness 3 points

Criteria Description

Language Use and Audience Awareness

5. Target 3 points

Word choice is distinctive, creative, and well-suited to the purpose, discipline, scope, and audience of the presentation.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Word choice is reflective of the intended audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary, and communicates clearly.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Some distracting inconsistencies or repetitions in word choice are present. Language is lacking awareness of the targeted

audience.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Inappropriate word choice is evident. Language is not reflective of the targeted audience.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Presentation 3 points

Criteria Description

Presentation

5. Target 3 points

The work is well presented. The overall appearance is neat and professional. Work would be highly desirable for public

dissemination.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor organizational flaws. Work would be desirable for public

dissemination.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

The work is somewhat disheveled and includes several organizational flaws. Work would barely be presentable for public

dissemination.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

The work is sloppy or chaotic. Work would not be presentable for public dissemination.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Supporting Research and Documentation of Sources 3 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate designated style and formatting to document sources in citations and references.

5. Target 3 points

Supporting research is compelling and thorough. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to

assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Supporting research is credible and relevant. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format

is mostly correct.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Supporting research is minimal and somewhat inaccurate. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and

style, although several minor formatting errors are present.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Supporting research is ineffective. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and

style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 3 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target 3 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes are free of mechanical errors. Skilled control of sentence structure is used throughout.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include a few mechanical errors. Suitable sentence structure is used.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include frequent and repetitive mechanical errors. Inconsistencies in sentence structure

are recurrent.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include errors in grammar or syntax that are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect

sentence structure errors are found throughout.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Total 60 points

https://www.gce.com/