Lesson Plan

LessonPlanAssignment.docx

Home >Education homework help >Lesson Plan

Students will write a lesson plan and teach the lesson to their case study student or to their peers on each of the following components. Incorporate standards for MS state in 5 sentences why you selected those standards for this assessment., integrating technology in each where appropriate:  Phonemic Awareness  Phonics/Word Study  Fluency  Vocabulary  Reading Comprehension + Use of Children’s Literature/Magazines  Writing/Spelling submit in a 1-2 page summary and PowerPoint format.

In this Lesson Plan explain how you will be teaching your students some basic and more complex directional skills so they can navigate and understand the basic complex directions in reading. This lesson should starts with teaching basic directions and mapping techniques, then moves on to complex directions. In this Lesson Plan explain how you will be teaching your students some basic and more complex directional skills so they can navigate and understand the basic complex directions in reading. This lesson should starts with teaching basic directions and mapping techniques, then moves on to complex directions.

Writing Rubric

Writing Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAppropriate Details

20.0 pts

Outstanding

Judicious choice of details maximizes interest and understanding

15.0 pts

Very Good

All relevant details presented, but details not critical to understanding omitted

10.0 pts

Good

Enough critical details presented for understanding, unnecessary details generally omitted

5.0 pts

Satisfactory

Most important details included but may include too much or too little detail for easy understanding

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Some critical details missing, unnecessary details may be present

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStatement of Context, Relevance in Subject Area

12.0 pts

Outstanding

Place of study in field clearly described, illuminating links to other studies or topics made

9.0 pts

Very Good

Place of study in field clearly described, some reference to relationship to other studies or topics

6.0 pts

Good

General reference of study in field described

3.0 pts

Satisfactory

Attempt made to place in context, possibly not quite appropriately

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

No attempt made to describe context of study

12.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriter's Evaluation of the Study

10.0 pts

Outstanding

Clearly articulated, well-supported statements of value and/or shortcomings of study

7.0 pts

Very Good

Evaluation includes positive value of study as well as clearly supported explanation of shortcomings

4.0 pts

Good

Good attempt at evaluation with some support of conclusions; possibly more negative than positive comments

2.0 pts

Satisfactory

Some attempt at evaluation, comments valid but not necessarily well supported

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

No attempt to evaluate study or evaluative statements unsupported or inappropriate

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall Organization

14.0 pts

Outstanding

Overall purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of study clearly stated; seemingly effortless and seamless logic flow

11.0 pts

Very Good

Overall purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of study clearly stated; logical flow always easy to follow

8.0 pts

Good

Purpose, methods, results and conclusions clearly stated; most of presentation flows logically

4.0 pts

Satisfactory

Purpose, methods, results, and conclusions stated; possibly some awkwardness in logical flow

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Major sections missing or lack of logical flow

14.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity of Explanations

18.0 pts

Outstanding

Sophisticated use of language maximizes interest, enjoyment and comprehension; explanations very clear, factually correct

14.0 pts

Very Good

All explanations are clear and easy to understand, factually correct

10.0 pts

Good

Most explanations clear and easy to understand, mostly factually correct

6.0 pts

Satisfactory

Overall meeting is understandable; possibly some areas of slight confusion or minor factual errors

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Serious difficulty explaining ideas, major factual errors; lack of comprehensibility

18.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of Terminology

10.0 pts

Outstanding

Correct use of all terminology, attention to nuances of meaning, judicious use of clearly defined jargon

7.0 pts

Very Good

All technical terms used correctly and defined clearly, including terms with different common meanings; overuse of jargon avoided

4.0 pts

Good

Few errors in use of terminology; definitions provided for technical terms, overuse of jargon avoided

2.0 pts

Satisfactory

Most terms used correctly, possibly some incorrect usage or use of unnecessary or undefined jargon

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Jargon terms used incorrectly, without definition; attempting to sound "scientific" without understanding meaning of terms

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Style

16.0 pts

Outstanding

Sophisticated, elegant style, complex yet lucid sentence structure, flawless grammar

12.0 pts

Very Good

Error-free, easy to read writing style, well practiced and polished use of language

8.0 pts

Good

Good basic writing style, easy to read, few errors, almost entirely in author's won words, little paraphrasing or unnecessary quotation

4.0 pts

Satisfactory

Mostly basic, correct writing style, relatively few errors and little awkwardness, minimal use of unnecessary quotation or paraphrasing

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Serious errors and awkwardness, excessive use of quotation in place of author's own words, excessive paraphrasing

16.0 pts

Total Points: 100.0