Scientific underpinnings for evidence based practice

C4: Summative Assessment Rubric

Criteria Ratings

Writing Mechanics

Sources

APA formatting

MASTERY Only minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctation errors present (1-2 errors). The overall sentence structure is well developed throughout, and paragraphs are fully developed with consistent style and clear communication.

PROFICIENT Minor spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks minor elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are consistently developed. (3-4 errors)

DEVELOPING Minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are not consistently developed. (5-7 errors)

EMERGING Multiple spelling grammar and/or punctuation errors present and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are minimally developed. (more than 7-9 errors)

NOT EVIDENT Significant spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are poorly developed. (10 or more errors

MASTERY The use of sources was consistent throughout the document in all areas to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.

PROFICIENT In most areas, sources were consistently used throughout the submission to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.

DEVELOPING Sources were occasionally used to support some claims and/or statements in the artifact, but statements were not consistently supported with sources throughout.

EMERGING Minimal usage of sources present in the artifact, and/or the overall communication lacked appropriate research support.

NOT EVIDENT Sources were not used to support major statements and/or claims, where needed in the artifact

MASTERY Citations, references, and formatting follow APA style guide, with only one or two minor errors.

PROFICIENT Citations, references, and formatting follow APA style guide, with more than 2 errors, but they are minor.

DEVELOPING APA style is demonstrated with some consistency, but the majority of the citation, references, and/or formatting is not correct.

EMERGING Formatting, citations, and/or references, are attempted, but do not follow APA style guidelines consistently.

NOT EVIDENT Formatting, citations, and references are not included, or do not follow appropriate APA style guide.

Criteria Ratings

Intended Outcome

Quality Enhancement Plan

Implementation Plan

MASTERY Information was provided with great detail on what outcomes were anticipated.

PROFICIENT Good information was provided on outcomes.

DEVELOPING Information was provided on outcomes with some detail.

EMERGING Information was provided on outcomes, but it was vague and hard to follow.

NOT EVIDENT No information was provided on outcomes to the implementation plan.

MASTERY The quality enhancement plan was shared with detailed information on the program outcome that is being enhanced and how this will be accomplished.

PROFICIENT The quality enhancement plan was shared and was easy to follow and understand.

DEVELOPING The quality enhancement plan was shared and had good information, but was too brief and lacked details.

EMERGING The quality enhancement plan was shared but it was disorganized and hard to follow.

NOT EVIDENT The quality enhancement plan was not provided.

MASTERY The submission clearly articulates the connection between the student need and identified teachers to specific strategies in the Instructional Playbook with specific examples provided. A description of how feedback from the teachers would be gathered and the process would be evaluated is clearly defined and supported with citations.

PROFICIENT The submission includes the connection between the student need and identified teachers to the strategies in the Instructional Playbook. A description of how feedback from the teachers would be gathered and the process would be evaluated is clearly defined.

DEVELOPING The submission includes the strategies from the Instructional Playbook that would be used. A description of how feedback from the teachers would be gathered and the process would be evaluated is noted, but not clearly connected to the student outcomes.

EMERGING The submission includes the strategies from the Instructional Playbook that would be used, a description of how feedback from the teachers would be gathered, and/or how the process would be evaluated, but not all three are clearly communicated or connected to the student outcomes.

NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include at least one of the following: the strategies from the Instructional Playbook that would be used, a description of how feedback from the teachers would be gathered, and/or how the process would be evaluated.

Criteria Ratings