need help asap
esyim
MULTIPLE.docx3 pages
APA
SOURCES:4
Scenario: Perhaps one of the most enduring beliefs about education relates to the concept of learning styles . Most people can probably identify whether they are more Visual, Auditory, or Kinesthetic learners, and it is popular to build teaching strategies around these different styles . However, recent research suggests the link between learning and teaching approaches designed around learning styles may be a myth. Howard Gardner , the Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at Harvard University, who coined the phrase “ multiple intelligences ,” even argues that his multiple intelligences theories have been misinterpreted and simplified into “learning styles.”
What are instructors to do? On the one hand, learning styles is a concept that seems meaningful to teachers and students; often students will expect that classes be tailored to their individualized learning styles. On the other hand, the research suggests that doing so may not meaningfully contribute to learning.
Purpose: First, research and analyze the conversation around multiple intelligences and learning styles. Does it seem like a myth, or is there value in tailoring learning activities after these styles? Next, based on your research and your personal learning experiences, write a research-based proposal essay that suggests ways your CMU English instructor could design class activities and writing assignments to account for your findings.
Essay genre: Research-based Proposal Essay
Essay audience: Your CMU English instructor
Details:
· Essays should effectively integrate outside research sources.
· All sources should be correctly cited using either MLA or APA style.
Common Assessment Scoring Rubric
|
|
4 Exceeds Expectations |
3 Meets Expectations |
2 Approaches Expectations |
1 Fails to Meet Expectations |
|
Thesis/Purpose |
The writer… · Presents a focused and sustained argument; · Proceeds with purpose appropriate for writer situation; · Pursues sophistication and complexity |
The writer… · Has a readily identifiable argument; · Presents a generally clear and focused sense of purpose; · Makes moves toward sophistication and complexity. |
The writer… · Has an argument, but one that might not be entirely unified, sustained, or immediately identifiable, · Pursues an ill-defined or inappropriate purpose; · Leans towards the obvious and simplistic |
The writer… · Lacks a central argument or provides an argument severely incongruent with purpose; · Is obvious and simplistic. |
|
Development and Support |
The writer… · Provides sufficient, relevant, and specific support; · Explores complexity through full, sensitive discussion of ideas and information; · Is sensitive to the subtleties of audience reactions. |
The writer… · Provides satisfactory support; · Moves towards complexity with discussion that explores, rather than simply presents, ideas and information; · Accounts for audience reactions. |
The writer… · Provides support that may be ill-chosen, insufficient, or vague; · Resists complexity with discussion of ideas and information that is often brief and general; · Takes audience’s reactions into little account. |
The writer… · Provides little support and/or support that is ill-chosen or vague; · Is overly simplistic and mostly lacks discussion; · Seems indifferent to audience reactions. |
|
Organization, structure, and coherence |
The writer… · Introduces and concludes effectively; · Employs logical, consistent, and coherent organizational units; · Arranges and sequences information appropriately for audience, purpose, and situation; · Highlights connections between ideas and builds coherence. |
The writer… · Introduces and concludes satisfactorily; · Employs organizational units that might occasionally want for logic, coherence, or consistency; · Arranges and sequences information in an orderly, predictable fashion; · Frequently builds coherence and highlights connections between ideas. |
The writer… · Introduces and concludes perfunctorily; · Employs organizational units that can lack clear evidence of underlying logic, coherence, or consistency; · Arranges and sequences information somewhat haphazardly or simplistically; · Takes few steps to highlight connections between ideas and build coherence. |
The writer… · Includes severely underthought introduction or conclusion (or no introduction or conclusion); · Employs organizational units that are haphazard (or fails to employ organizational units); · Lacks direction in the arrangement and sequencing of information; · Does not highlight connections between ideas and build coherence. |
|
Language |
The writer… · Chooses a tone and level of formality appropriate for audience, purpose, and situation; · Uses language and syntax for deliberate effect; · Usually employs sophisticated, engaging language and precise word choice. |
The writer… · Employs proficient and unobtrusive, if unmodulated, tone and level of formality; · Occasionally uses language and syntax for deliberate effect; · Occasionally uses sophisticated engaging, and precise word choice. |
The writer… · Employs a tone and level of formality that may be inappropriate for audience, purpose, and situation; · Uses language and syntax that shows little regard for effect; · Uses language that can be imprecise, unclear, or incorrect. |
The writer… · Employs a tone and level of formality inappropriate for audience, purpose, and situation; · Uses language and syntax haphazardly; · Frequently employs imprecise, unclear, or incorrect language. |
|
Mechanics |
The writer… · Usually follows appropriate conventions for spelling, grammar, and usage; · Cites sources according to relevant conventions with few, minor formatting errors. |
The writer… · Often follows appropriate conventions for spelling, grammar, and usage, with some errors; · Cites sources within the basic guidelines of relevant conventions, but with some minor errors. |
The writer… · Contains several errors in spelling, grammar, and usage; · Cites sources, but loosely or casually and with disregard for relevant conventions. |
The writer… · Contains many errors in spelling, grammar, and usage; · Does not cite sources or cites sources in such a way as to make it extremely difficult to find original sources. |
