| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| ELM-305 | ELM-305-O501 | Clinical Field Experience C: Literacy Pre-Assessment | 35.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | No Submission (0.00%) | Insufficient (65.00%) | Approaching (75.00%) | Acceptable (85.00%) | Target (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% |
| Part 1: Pre-Assessment | 20.0% | Not addressed. | Pre-assessment is inappropriately aligned to the chosen standard and learning objective. | Pre-assessment is plausibly aligned to the chosen standard and learning objective. | Pre-assessment is relevantly aligned to the chosen standard and learning objective. | Pre-assessment is insightfully aligned to the chosen standard and learning objective. |
| Part 2: Reflection: Mentor’s Feedback | 25.0% | Not addressed. | A reflection of mentor feedback related to pre-assessment is incomplete. Weakly Identifies a strength of the assessment and an opportunity for growth. Does not include how the assessment could be changed better assess the students’ reading skills | An entry level reflection of mentor feedback related to pre-assessment is provided. Basically identifies a strength of the assessment and an opportunity for growth. Sufficiently includes how the assessment could be changed better assess the students’ reading skills | A solid reflection of mentor feedback related to pre-assessment is provided. Clearly Identifies a strength of the assessment and an opportunity for growth. Appropriately includes how the assessment could be changed better assess the students’ reading skills | A creative and substantial reflection of mentor feedback related to pre-assessment, is provided. Skillfully Identifies a strength of the assessment and an opportunity for growth. Includes thorough reflection of how the assessment could be changed better assess the students’ reading skills |
| Part 2: Reflection: Conclusions and Applications to Future Practice | 35.0% | Not addressed. | Responses on applying conclusions to practice is not related to assignment or not submitted. | Conclusions and applications to future practice are lacking in detail, but are appropriate for the elementary setting. | Conclusions and applications to future practice are thoughtful, realistic for the classroom setting, and reflect professional growth. | Conclusions and applications to future practice are insightful, demonstrate a keen awareness of the needs of the students, and clearly reflect growth and development as a professional. |
| Organization | 5.0% | Not addressed. | An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other. | The content is adequately organized, generally providing the audience with a sense of the main idea. | The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. | The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used. | Submission includes mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Effective sentence structures are used, as well as some practice and content-related language. | Submission is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech are used, as well as appropriate 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. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Not addressed. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some 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. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
mdavis_1
Rubric_Print_Format16.xlsx
