Pr007 Work Product
Unique1961
PR007_Rubric.pdf
©2016 Walden University 1
PR007: Supporting Language and Literacy Development in the Preschool
Rubric
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
Part I: Observe and Critique a Language Development Lesson
Sub-Competency 1: Evaluate the effectiveness of learning activities related to language development.
LO1.1: Critique a preschool lesson plan designed to promote language development.
Critique of a preschool lesson plan designed to promote language development is missing.
Response includes a vague or invalid critique of the appropriateness of learning objectives for the children in the case presented and/or their alignment to early childhood standards, or the critique is missing. Response includes a vague or invalid critique of the activities, strategies, and grouping structures that will be used to promote language development in terms of their potential for achieving the learning objectives, or the critique is missing. Response includes a vague or valid critique of inputs that informed the teacher’s planning, such
Response includes a clear and valid critique of the appropriateness of learning objectives for the children in the case presented and their alignment to early childhood standards.
Response includes a clear and valid critique of the activities, strategies, and grouping structures that will be used to promote language development in terms of their potential for achieving the learning objectives. Response includes a clear and valid critique of inputs that informed the teacher’s planning, such as assessment data, children’s needs, and differences.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes a reference to an academic/professional resource to support the insights.
©2016 Walden University 2
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
as assessment data, children’s needs, and differences; or the critique is missing. Response identifies fewer than two examples of the children’s individual language needs and/or provides a vague or invalid critique of how the instruction will be differentiated to meet varying needs.
Response includes a vague and/or invalid critique of the informal assessments that will be used during lesson implementation, or the critique is missing.
Response identifies two examples of the children’s individual language needs and includes a clear and valid critique of how the instruction will be differentiated to meet those needs. Response includes a clear and valid critique of the informal assessments that will be used during lesson implementation.
LO1.2 Critique the implementation of preschool language development lesson.
Record of an observation of a preschool language development lesson is missing.
Response vaguely describes and critiques the overall level of children’s engagement during the lesson and includes two specific examples, or only one example is given. Response provides and critiques fewer than three clear examples of
Response clearly describes and critiques the overall level of children’s engagement during the lesson and includes two specific examples. Response provides and critiques three examples of children’s responses to
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes an explanation of other actions the teacher could have taken during the lesson to support the children’s learning.
©2016 Walden University 3
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
children’s responses to the activities and strategies conducted during the lesson, and/or the examples/critiques are vague or missing.
Response vaguely describes and critiques examples of how the teacher adjusted the lesson based on informal assessments conducted during implementation, or the examples are missing.
the activities and strategies conducted during the lesson. Response clearly describes and critiques examples of how the teacher adjusted the lesson based on informal assessments conducted during implementation.
L01.3 Evaluate the effectiveness of a preschool language development lesson.
Evaluation of the results of a preschool language development lesson is missing.
Response vaguely explains whether the activities and strategies implemented were successful or not, and/or an explanation of why they were or were not successful is missing. Response cites fewer than two examples of evidence, or the examples are not relevant. Response vaguely explains whether or not the learning objectives were achieved and/or does not
Response clearly explains whether the activities and strategies implemented were successful or not, and why. Response cites at least two examples of evidence. Response clearly explains whether or not the learning objectives were achieved and includes examples.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes a reference to an academic/professional resource to support the actions.
©2016 Walden University 4
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
include examples.
Part 2: Observe and Critique a Language Lesson
Sub-Competency 2: Evaluate the effectiveness of learning activities related to phonemic awareness and phonics.
LO2.1: Critique a preschool lesson plan designed to promote phonemic awareness and phonics.
Critique of a preschool lesson plan designed to promote phonemic awareness and phonics is missing.
Response includes a vague or illogical critique of the appropriateness of learning objectives for the children in the case presented and/or their alignment to early childhood standards, or the critique is missing. Response includes a vague or illogical critique of the activities and strategies that will be used to promote phonemic awareness and phonics in terms of their potential for achieving the learning objectives, or the critique is missing. Response identifies fewer than two examples of the children’s individual literacy needs and explains how those needs will be met according to the plan, or the
Response includes a critique of the appropriateness of learning objectives for the children in the case presented. Response includes a critique of the activities and strategies that will be used to promote phonemic awareness and phonics in terms of their potential for achieving the learning objectives. Response identifies two examples of the children’s individual literacy needs and explains how those needs will be met according to the plan.
Response describes informal assessments that will be used during lesson implementation.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes a reference to an academic/professional resource to support the insights.
©2016 Walden University 5
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
explanations are unclear or missing.
Response vaguely describes informal assessments that will be used during lesson implementation, or the description is missing.
LO2.2 Critique the implementation of a preschool phonemic awareness and phonics development lesson.
Record of an observation of a preschool phonemic awareness and phonics lesson is missing.
Response vaguely describes the overall level of children’s engagement during the lesson and includes two specific examples, or only one example is given. Response provides fewer than three clear examples of children’s responses to the activities and strategies conducted during the lesson, and/or the examples are not clear.
Response vaguely describes examples of how the teacher adjusted the lesson based on informal assessments conducted during
Response clearly describes the overall level of children’s engagement during the lesson, and includes two specific examples. Response provides three clear examples of children’s responses to the activities and strategies conducted during the lesson.
Response clearly describes examples of how the teacher adjusted the lesson based on informal assessments conducted during implementation.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes an explanation of other actions the teacher could have taken during the lesson to support the children’s learning.
©2016 Walden University 6
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
implementation, or the examples are missing.
L02.3 Evaluate the effectiveness of a preschool phonemic awareness and phonics lesson.
Evaluation of the results of a preschool phonemic awareness and phonics lesson is missing.
Response vaguely explains whether the activities and strategies implemented were successful or not, and/or an explanation of why they were or were not successful is missing. Response cites fewer than two examples of evidence, or the examples are not relevant. Response vaguely explains whether or not the learning objectives were achieved and/or does not include examples.
Response clearly explains whether the activities and strategies implemented were successful or not, and why. Response cites at least two examples of evidence. Response clearly explains whether or not the learning objectives were achieved and includes examples.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response includes a reference to an academic/professional resource to support the actions.
Part III: Create a Lesson That Supports Vocabulary, Fluency, Comprehension, and Writing
Sub-Competency 3: Plan, implement, and engage in critical reflection on a preschool lesson that supports vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and writing.
LO3.1 Provide foundational information for a preschool literacy lesson that supports vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension, and writing.
Foundational information for a preschool literacy lesson that supports vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension is missing.
Response vaguely or incompletely identifies: - Vocabulary, fluency,
and comprehension content areas
- Developmental domains
- Pre-K literacy learning
Response clearly identifies: - Vocabulary, fluency,
and comprehension content areas
- Writing skill(s) to be addressed
- Developmental
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response explains how foundational elements are aligned. .
©2016 Walden University 7
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
standards - Learning
goals/objectives - Materials/technology/
equipment/resources
domains - Pre-K literacy learning
standards - Learning
goals/objectives - Materials/technology/
equipment/resources
LO3.2 Describe the lesson introduction/anticipatory set.
Lesson introduction/anticipatory set is missing.
Response vaguely describes one or more activities that establish a warm connection and captures children’s attention.
Response clearly describes one or more activities that establish a warm connection and captures children’s attention.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response explains the decision-making process used in determining the introduction/anticipatory set.
LO3.3 Explain steps in the lesson for building knowledge and skills.
Steps in the lesson for building knowledge and skills are missing.
Response describes generally or in random sequence what the teacher and the children will do in all activities and transitions that are part of this learning experience. Explanation given for how the activity might be differentiated to meet the needs of individual children, including children with exceptionalities is vague,
Response describes specifically, and in a step- by-step fashion, what the teacher and the children will do in all activities and transitions that are part of this learning experience. Explanation, for each activity, is given for how the activity might be differentiated to meet the needs of individual children, including children with
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:
Response explains the decision-making process used in determining steps in the lesson for building knowledge and skills.
©2016 Walden University 8
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
does not reflect research- based strategies, or is missing.
exceptionalities.
LO3.4 Describe strategies that will be used to assess children’s learning.
Strategies that will be used to assess children’s learning are missing.
Response vaguely explains how children’s learning will be assessed during and/or after the lesson. Assessment does not use observation/documentati on. Assessment is not aligned with lesson goals/objectives.
Response clearly explains how children’s learning will be assessed during and/or after the lesson. Assessment includes observation/documentati on. Assessment is aligned with lesson goals/objectives.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response explains the decision-making process used in determining strategies that will be used to assess children’s learning.
Learning Objective 4.5: Describe a lesson closure activity.
Lesson closure activity is missing.
Closure activities/strategies that will be used to bring closure to the lesson are misaligned with the lesson. Closure activities/strategies do not involve summarizing, reviewing, and/or reflecting on the learning that has taken place during the lesson.
Response describes one or more activities/strategies that will be used to bring closure to the lesson. Closure activities/strategies involve summarizing, reviewing, and/or reflecting on the learning that has taken place during the lesson.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following: Response explains the decision-making process used in determining a lesson closure activity.
Learning Objective 4.6: Engage in critical reflection of lesson
Critical reflection of lesson implementation is missing.
Response vaguely describes children’s responses during the
Response clearly describes children’s responses during the lesson that
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus
©2016 Walden University 9
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
implementation. lesson that show whether or not children are grasping the literacy skills and concepts being targeted. Response vaguely describes adjustments made during the lesson based on children’s responses. Response vaguely explains whether or not the adjustments were effective and why.
show whether or not children are grasping the literacy skills and concepts being targeted. Response clearly describes adjustments made during the lesson based on children’s responses and explains whether or not the adjustments were effective and why. Response explains what could be done differently next time and what next steps can be taken to promote learning. Response explains how families and others can be involved to support the children’s literacy learning.
the following: Response explains how the planning, implementation, and reflection experiences supported professional growth and learning.
PS001: Written Communication: Demonstrate graduate-level writing skills.
Learning Objective PS 1.1: Use proper grammar, spelling, and mechanics.
Multiple major and minor errors in grammar, spelling, and/or mechanics are highly distracting and seriously impact readability.
Multiple minor errors in grammar, spelling, and/or mechanics are distracting and negatively impact readability.
Writing reflects competent use of standard edited American English.
Errors in grammar, spelling, and/or
Grammar, spelling, and mechanics reflect a high- level of accuracy in standard American English and enhance readability.
©2016 Walden University 10
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
mechanics do not negatively impact readability.
Learning Objective PS 1.2: Organize writing to enhance clarity.
Writing is poorly organized and incoherent. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions are missing or inappropriate.
Writing is loosely organized. Limited use of introductions, transitions, and conclusions provides partial continuity.
Writing is generally well organized. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions provide continuity and a logical progression of ideas.
Writing is consistently well organized. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions are used effectively to enhance clarity, cohesion, and flow.
Learning Objective PS 1.3: Support writing with appropriate resources.
Writing does not integrate appropriate resources and content in support of ideas and argument.
Writing loosely integrates some appropriate resources and content in support of ideas and argument.
Writing sufficiently integrates appropriate resources (which may include peer-reviewed resources) and content in support of ideas and argument.
Writing effectively integrates appropriate resources (which may include peer-reviewed resources) and content to support and expand upon ideas and arguments.
Learning Objective PS 1.4: Apply APA style to written work.
APA conventions are not applied.
APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are applied inconsistently.
APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are generally applied correctly in most instances. Sources are generally cited appropriately and accurately.
APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are applied correctly and consistently throughout the paper. Sources are consistently cited appropriately and accurately.
Learning Objective PS 1.5: Use appropriate vocabulary and tone for the audience and purpose.
Vocabulary and tone are inappropriate and negatively impact clarity of concepts to be conveyed.
Vocabulary and tone have limited relevance to the audience.
Vocabulary and tone are generally appropriate for the audience and support communication of key concepts.
Vocabulary and tone are consistently tailored to the audience and effectively and directly support communication of key concepts.
©2016 Walden University 11
0 Not Present
1 Needs Improvement
2 Meets Expectations
3 Exceeds Expectations
PS005: Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Use critical thinking and problem-solving skills to analyze professional issues and inform best practice.
Learning Objective PS 5.1: Analyze assumptions and fallacies.
Analysis of assumptions is missing.
Response is weak in assessing the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument. Response does not adequately identify and discuss the implications of fallacies or logical weaknesses in a given argument.
Response generally assesses the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument. Response identifies and discusses the implications of fallacies and/or logical weaknesses in a given argument.
Response clearly and comprehensively assesses the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument. Response provides a detailed and compelling analysis of implications of fallacies and logical weaknesses in a given argument.
Learning Objective PS 5.2: Generate reasonable and appropriate assumptions.
Assumptions are missing. Response does not adequately present and discuss key assumptions in an original argument.
Response presents and discusses key assumptions in an original argument.
Response justifies the reasonableness and need for assumptions in an original argument.
Learning Objective PS 5.3: Assess multiple perspectives and alternatives.
Assessment of multiple perspectives is missing.
Response does not identify nor adequately consider multiple perspectives or alternatives.
Response identifies and considers multiple perspectives and alternatives.
Response justifies selection of chosen alternative relative to others.
Learning Objective PS 5.4: Use problem-solving skills.
Problems and solutions are not identified.
Response presents solutions but they are ineffective in addressing the specific problem.
Response presents solutions that are practical and work in addressing the specific problem.
Response presents compelling supporting arguments for proposed solutions.
