| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| ELM-210 | ELM-210-O502 | Educational Terminology Associated with Lesson Planning | 50.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | No submission (0.00%) | Insufficient (65.00%) | Approaching (75.00%) | Acceptable (85.00%) | Target (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% |
| Education Terminology | 20.0% | Not addressed. | Explanation/definition of the educational terminology is incorrect or demonstrates inadequate understanding of the concept. | Explanation/definition of the educational is basic and demonstrates moderate understanding of the concept. | Explanation/definition of the educational is detailed and demonstrates clear understanding of the concept. | Explanation/definition of the educational is comprehensive and demonstrates proficient understanding of the concept. |
| Educational Term?s Purpose | 20.0% | Not addressed. | Example of the term's purpose is weak and does not connect how the term applies to the lesson planning process. | Example of the term's purpose is plausible and broadly connects how the term applies to the lesson planning process. | Example of the term's purpose is correctly describes and effectively connects how the term applies to the lesson planning process. | Example of the term's purpose is thought provoking and skillfully connects how the term applies to the lesson planning process. |
| Analysis of Core Lesson Planning Components | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Analysis of the core lesson planning components is unfocused and demonstrates a minimal understanding of the concept. | Analysis of the core lesson planning components is sufficient and demonstrates a cursory understanding of the concept. | Analysis of the core lesson planning components is detailed and demonstrates significant understanding of the concept. | Analysis of the core lesson planning components exceeds standards and demonstrates sophisticated understanding of the concept. |
| Similarities/Differences in the Terminology Formats | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the terminology between formats is inaccurate and demonstrates a lack of understanding of lesson planning terminology. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the terminology between formats fulfills expectations and demonstrates moderate understanding of lesson planning terminology. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the terminology between formats is accurate and demonstrates considerable understanding of lesson planning terminology. | Analysis of the di similarities/differences in the terminology between formats is comprehensive and demonstrates extensive understanding of lesson planning terminology. |
| Similarities/Differences in the Organizational Formats | 10.0% | Not addressed. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the organization between formats is incomplete and demonstrates a lack of understanding of each lesson plan format. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the organization between formats fulfills expectations and demonstrates entry-level understanding of each lesson plan format. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the organization between formats is descriptive and demonstrates competent understanding of each lesson plan format. | Analysis of the similarities/differences in the organization between formats is thorough and demonstrates exceptional understanding of each lesson plan format. |
| Organization | 15.0% | Not addressed. | An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The ideas presented are compartmentalized; 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 related to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit. Provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 15.0% | 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 are present. Varieties 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. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
mdavis_1
Rubric_Print_Format23.xlsx
