| Course Code | Class Code |
| ECS-570 | ECS-570-O500 | Effects of Oral Language | 100.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | No Submission (0.00%) | Insufficient (69.00%) | Approaching (74.00%) | Acceptable (87.00%) | Target (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% |
| Effects of Oral Language [CEC S3.2, S3.4; InTASC 9d; NAEYC 5c] | 20.0% | Not addressed. | The essay provides an inaccurate or incomplete discussion on how oral language affects decoding, reading comprehension, and written expression. | The essay provides a minimal discussion on the effects of oral language. The discussion includes decoding, reading comprehension, or written expression, but few details are given and explanation could be clearer. | The essay provides an adequate discussion on the effects of oral language on decoding, reading comprehension, and written expression. Relevant details are provided. | The essay provides a clear and thorough discussion on the effects of oral language on decoding, reading comprehension, and written expression. Relevant and insightful details are provided. |
| Communicative Strategies for Reading Skills [CEC 3.2; NAEYC 5a; InTASC 8(a)] | 15.0% | Not addressed. | The essay inadequately describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop reading skills. An unclear explanation of how these strategies improve decoding and comprehension is given. | The essay broadly describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop reading skills. A minimal explanation of how these strategies improve decoding and comprehension is given. | The essay adequately describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop reading skills. A sound explanation of how these strategies improve decoding and comprehension is given. | The essay compellingly describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop reading skills. A thorough explanation of how these strategies improve decoding and comprehension is given. |
| Communicative Strategies for Written Expression [CEC 3.2; NAEYC 5a; InTASC 8(a)] | 15.0% | Not addressed. | The essay inadequately describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop written expression skills. An unclear explanation of how these strategies improve the quality of writing is given. | The essay broadly describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop written expression skills. A minimal explanation of how these strategies improve the quality of writing is given. | The essay adequately describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop written expression skills. A sound explanation of how these strategies improve the quality of writing is given. | The essay compellingly describes communicative strategies that can be used to develop written expression skills. A thorough explanation of how these strategies improve the quality of writing is given. |
| Assistive Technology | 15.0% | Not addressed. | Assistive technology examples are inappropriate for the case study student. | Assistive technology is addressed, but the examples provided are minimally described, or are not the best choices for supporting the needs of the case study student. | Appropriate examples of assistive technology that can be used to support the development areas of the case study student are included. | Realistic, well-suited examples of assistive technology that can be used to support the areas of development for the case study student are included. |
| Research | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Sources provided do not support the claims of the presentation or are not credible. | Submission includes only 1-2 sources, sources do not fully support claims, or sources are not all credible. | Research is relevant and generally supports the information presented. All of the criteria stated in the assignment are addressed. | Research is supportive of the information presented. Sources are timely, distinctive and clearly address all of the criteria stated in the assignment. |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| 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 is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some 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. |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor formatting errors are present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Overall Presentation | 5.0% | Not addressed. | The work is not neat or organized. Work would not be presentable to school colleagues. | The work is not neat and includes several minor organizational flaws. Work would barely be presentable to school colleagues. | The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor organizational flaws. Work would be presentable to school colleagues. | The work is well presented. The overall appearance is neat and professional. Work would be highly presentable to school colleagues. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
rnixon@123
Rubric_Print_Format11.xlsx
