| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| ELM-570 | ELM-570-O500 | Lope Talk - Engaging Students in Science Instruction | 60.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | No Submission (0.00%) | Insufficient (69.00%) | Approaching (74.00%) | Acceptable (87.00%) | Target (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 100.0% |
| Lopes Talk | 35.0% | Not addressed. | Lopes Talk video is poorly developed and is missing components of examples to engage students through the instruction of science as a professional development to fellow science teachers. | Lopes Talk video is underdeveloped and presented with vague examples to engage students through the instruction of science as a professional development to fellow science teachers. | Lopes Talk video is adequately developed and presented with clear and direct ways to engage students through the instruction of science as a professional development to fellow science teachers. | Lopes Talk video is expertly developed and presented with insightful and proficient ways to engage students through the instruction of science as a professional development to fellow science teachers. Lopes Talk video is expertly developed and presented with insightful and proficient ways to engage students through the instruction of science as a professional development to fellow science teachers. |
| Video Strategies and Engagement | 35.0% | Not addressed. | Lopes Talk video includes poorly-developed strategies to engage students through active inquiry and poorly support collaboration, science methods, and the creative incorporation of technology. | Lopes Talk video includes overly simplistic strategies to engage students through active inquiry and vaguely support collaboration, science methods, and the creative incorporation of technology. | Lopes Talk video includes credible and realistic strategies to engage students through active inquiry and clearly support collaboration, science methods, and the creative incorporation of technology. | Lopes Talk video includes innovative strategies to engage students through active inquiry and proficiently support collaboration, science methods, and the creative incorporation of technology. |
| Visual Appeal | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Use of visual elements are poor and inappropriate. | Use of visual elements are vague and overly simplistic. Elements do not consistently contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. | Relevant visual elements are appropriately used. Visual connections logically contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. | Creative and thematic video elements are used to make compelling visual connections that contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. |
| Presentation of Content | 15.0% | Not addressed. | The video content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information. | The video is generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization, or in their relationships to each other. | The video is a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. | The video is clear and concise. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. |
| Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Presentation is busy and lacks a uniform, clean appearance. Minimal graphics are used. Readability is negatively impacted. | Presentation is visually appealing, makes use of images and graphics. Lack of control with formatting is apparent and readability is impacted. | Presentation is visually appealing, makes use of images and graphics, and is engaging without being overly busy. Readability is considered. | Presentation is visually appealing, makes maximum use of images and graphics, and is engaging without being overly busy. Readability is clearly considered. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Royce0615
Rubric_Print_Format12.xlsx
