| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| SPD-400 | SPD-400-O500 | Benchmark - Proposal for Behavior Change Plan | 300.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | No Submission (0.00%) | Insufficient (65.00%) | Approaching (75.00%) | Acceptable (85.00%) | Target (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% |
| Part 1: Data Collection and Definition of Student Behavior - ABC Chart | 5.0% | Not addressed. | ABC chart depicting data found in Joseph’s student scenario is inadequate and includes vague or inaccurate descriptions. | ABC chart depicting data found in Joseph’s student scenario is appropriate and includes basic descriptions. | ABC chart depicting data found in Joseph’s student scenario is sound and includes accurate, clear descriptions. | ABC chart depicting data found in Joseph’s student scenario is comprehensive and includes realistic, objective descriptions. |
| Part 1: Operationally Defined Target Behavior | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Operational definition for Joseph’s target behavior is inaccurate, overly simple or not measurable, and observable. | Sufficiently developed, measurable, observable operational definition for Joseph’s target behavior is provided. | Accurate, measurable, observable operational definition for Joseph’s target behavior is provided. | Thorough, precise measurable, observable operational definition for Joseph’s target behavior is provided. |
| Part 2: Analysis of Data COE: 4.3 [CEC 4.2; ICSI.4.K1, ICSI.4.K2, ICSI.4.K3, ICSI.4.K4, ICSI.4.S1, ICSI.4.S5, ICSI.4.S6, ICSI.4.S8, IGC.4.K1; InTASC 6(c), 6(k), 7(l), 7(q); MC2, MC5] | 15.0% | Not addressed. | Narrative ineffectively analyzes and discusses emerging patterns discovered in Part 1. A vague or inaccurate hypothesis is developed depicting why the behavior is occurring. Hypothesis is weakly justified by interpreting assessment results, guiding educational decisions. | Narrative attempts to analyze and discuss emerging patterns discovered in Part 1. A simple hypothesis is developed depicting why the behavior is occurring. Hypothesis is plausibly justified by interpreting assessment results, guiding educational decisions. | Narrative provides a logical analysis and discusses emerging patterns discovered in Part 1. A sound hypothesis is developed depicting why the behavior is occurring. Hypothesis is completely justified by interpreting assessment results, guiding educational decisions. | Narrative provides a skillful analysis and discusses emerging patterns discovered in Part 1. An expert hypothesis is developed depicting why the behavior is occurring. Hypothesis is insightfully justified by interpreting assessment results, guiding educational decisions. |
| Part 3: Intervention Ideas and Replacement Behaviors COE: 3.7 [CEC 2.2; ICSI.2.K5, ICSI.2.S2, ICSI.2.S3, IGC.2.S3, IGC.5.S23, IGC.5.S24; InTASC 3(d), 3(e), 3(l); MC1, MC2] | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Motivational and instructional intervention ideas are inappropriate or inadequate for helping Joseph adapt to different environments while promoting safe and appropriate behaviors. | Motivational and instructional intervention ideas are broad and sufficiently help Joseph adapt to different environments while promoting safe and appropriate behaviors. | Motivational and instructional intervention ideas are sound and clearly help Joseph adapt to different environments while promoting safe and appropriate behaviors. | Motivational and instructional intervention ideas are creative and distinctly help Joseph adapt to different environments while promoting safe and appropriate behaviors. |
| Part 4: Proposed Intervention Plan - Steps of Implementation and Management Strategies COE: 3.13 [CEC 2.1; ICSI.2.K1, ICSI.2.K2, ICSI.2.K3, ICSI.2.K4, ICSI.2.K5, ICSI.2.S1, ICSI.2.S4, ICSI.2.S15, ICSI.7.S6, IGC.7.K1, IGC.7.K4, IGC.7.S1, IGC.7.S2, IGC.7.S4; InTASC 3(a), 3(c), 3(f), 3(k); MC1, MC3, MC4, MC5] | 15.0% | Not addressed. | Identification of replacement behavior is unsuitable. Intervention plan unclearly outlines specific steps to help Joseph reach his goal. Inappropriate or under-developed strategies and rewards/reinforcements to manage activities and social interaction through collaboration with staff are also included. | Identification of replacement behavior is rudimentary. Intervention plan appropriately outlines specific steps to help Joseph reach his goal along with simple strategies and rewards/reinforcements to manage activities and social interaction through collaboration with staff. | Identification of replacement behavior is sound. Intervention plan provides detailed outline for specific steps to help Joseph reach his goals. Relevant strategies and rewards/reinforcements to manage activities and social interaction through collaboration with staff are also present. | Identification of replacement behavior is proficient. Intervention plan provides a quality outline for specific steps to change behavior. Compelling, realistic professional strategies and rewards/reinforcements to manage activities and social interaction through collaboration with staff are also incorporated. |
| Part 4: Proposed Intervention Plan – Progress Monitoring COE: 4.4 [CEC 4.3, ICSI.4.K1, ICSI.4.K2, ICSI.4.S4, ICSI.4.S1, ICSI.4.S6, ICSI.6.K4, ICSI.7.K2, ICSI.7.K3, ICSI.7.K4, ICSI.7.S2, ICSI.7.S3, ICSI.7.S4, ICSI.7.S5, ICSI.7.S3, ICSI.7.S10, IGC.4.K1, IGC.4.K2, IGC.4.K3, IGC.7.K2, IGC.7.S2; InTASC 6(g), 6(i), 6(o), 6(t), 6(v), 9(c), 9(l) 10(a); MC1, MC2, MC3, MC4, MC5] | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Plan to gather ongoing data from colleagues and family for progress monitoring is unrealistic or ineffective. | Plan to gather ongoing data from colleagues and family for progress monitoring is minimal. | Sound plan for gathering ongoing data from colleagues and family for progress monitoring is provided. | Proficient, realistic plan for gathering ongoing data from colleagues and family for progress monitoring is provided. |
| Part 4: Proposed Intervention Plan – Resolving Escalation COE: 1.8 [CEC 2.3, ICSI.2.K6, ICSI.2.S10, IGC.2.S4, IGC.2.S5, IGC.2.S6, IGC.6.S2; InTASC 2(h); MC2, MC4, MC5] | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Intervention plan lacks detailed steps to resolve escalation of behavior safely or steps presented are inappropriate. | Intervention plan includes basic steps to resolve escalation of behavior safely and appropriately. | Intervention plan includes appropriate steps to resolve escalation of behavior safely and appropriately. | Intervention plan includes thoughtful steps to resolve escalation of behavior safely and appropriately. |
| Part 5: Reflection COE: 4.2 [CEC 4.1; ICSI.4.K1, ICSI.4.K2, ICSI.4.K4. ICSI.4.S1, ICSI.4.S5, ICSI.4.S2, ICSI.4.S8, IGC.4.K1, IGC.4.K3, IGC.4.S1, IGC.4.S2, IGC.4.S3, IGC.4.S4; InTASC 6(a), 6(b), 6(h), 6(j), 6(k); MC2, MC3, MC5] | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Summary insufficiently reflects upon how formal and informal assessments of student behaviors are unbiased and technically sound, considering culture, language, gender, and ability differences in his or her future professional practice. | Summary sufficiently reflects upon how formal and informal assessments of student behaviors are unbiased and technically sound, considering culture, language, gender, and ability differences in his or her future professional practice. | Summary clearly reflects upon how formal and informal assessments of student behaviors are unbiased and technically sound, considering culture, language, gender, and ability differences in his or her future professional practice. | Summary provides a compelling reflection and includes how formal and informal assessments of student behaviors are unbiased and technically sound, considering culture, language, gender, and ability differences in his or her future professional practice. |
| Template Format | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Content is confusing. Template is missing key elements or includes pervasive errors. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Content is somewhat unfocused. Appropriate template is used, but formatting includes several minor errors or some lack of clarity. | Content is clear. Appropriate template is fully used. There are very few errors in formatting style. | Content is well-presented and easy to read. All template and format elements are correct. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used. | Submission includes mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Effective sentence structures are used, as well as some practice and content-related language. | Submission is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few are present. A variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech are used, as well as appropriate practice and content-related language. | 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. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors are present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are documented completely and correctly, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
BenchmarkRubric.xlsx
