10-12 slideshow

Maria2316

TSL-568Rubric-BenchmarkAddressingtheDiverseNeedsofELLs.pdf

Home >Education homework help >10-12 slideshow

Benchmark – Addressing the Diverse Needs of ELLs - Rubric

Factors A�ecting Learning (B) 50 points

Criteria Description

C2.5

5. Target 50 points

The importance of understanding how the individual identity of the ELL student

impacts the student’s learning, development, and achievement is compelling.

Provides a sophisticated rationale, including major concepts, principles, theories, or

research, for developing awareness of the role of culture/cultural groups to

construct supportive learning environments for ELLs, including those with

exceptionalities.

4. Acceptable 43.5 points

The importance of understanding how the individual identity of the ELL student

impacts the student’s learning, development, and achievement is noteworthy.

Provides a significant rationale, including major concepts, principles, theories, or

research, for developing awareness of the role of culture/cultural groups to

construct supportive learning environments for ELLs, including those with

exceptionalities.

3. Approaching 37 points

The importance of understanding how the individual identity of the ELL student

impacts the student’s learning, development, and achievement is overly simplistic.

Provides a weak rationale, including major concepts, principles, theories, or

research, for developing awareness of the role of culture/cultural groups to

construct supportive learning environments for ELLs, including those with

exceptionalities.

2. Insufficient 34.5 points

The importance of understanding how the individual identity of the ELL student

impacts the student’s learning, development, and achievement is insufficient.

Provides a poor rationale, including major concepts, principles, theories, or

research, for developing awareness of the role of culture/cultural groups to

construct supportive learning environments for ELLs, including those with

exceptionalities.

1. No Submission 0 points

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Personal Characteristics (B) 40 points

Criteria Description

C2.1

5. Target 40 points

Methods that educators can implement to learn about personal characteristics of

individual ELLs with exceptionalities and their families to develop effective

instructional practices are innovative.

4. Acceptable 34.8 points

Methods that educators can implement to learn about personal characteristics of

individual ELLs with exceptionalities and their families to develop effective

instructional practices are effective.

3. Approaching 29.6 points

Methods that educators can implement to learn about personal characteristics of

individual ELLs with exceptionalities and their families to develop effective

instructional practices are weak.

2. Insufficient 27.6 points

Methods that educators can implement to learn about personal characteristics of

individual ELLs with exceptionalities and their families to develop effective

instructional practices are flawed.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Instructional and Assessment Practices (B) 40 points

Criteria Description

C2.3

5. Target 40 points

Methods that can be implemented to collect information on the ELL student’s

academic characteristics, including background knowledge, educational history, and

current performance data, to develop effective, individualized instructional and

assessment practices for the ELL are sophisticated.

4. Acceptable 34.8 points

Methods that can be implemented to collect information on the ELL student’s

academic characteristics, including background knowledge, educational history, and

current performance data, to develop effective, individualized instructional and

assessment practices for the ELL are significant.

3. Approaching 29.6 points

Methods that can be implemented to collect information on the ELL student’s

academic characteristics, including background knowledge, educational history, and

current performance data, to develop effective, individualized instructional and

assessment practices for the ELL are shallow.

2. Insufficient 27.6 points

Methods that can be implemented to collect information on the ELL student’s

academic characteristics, including background knowledge, educational history, and

current performance data, to develop effective, individualized instructional and

assessment practices for the ELL are ineffective.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Collaboration with ELL Families 40 points

Criteria Description

Collaboration with ELL Families

5. Target 40 points

Recommendations for how to collaborate with ELL families in meeting the needs of

ELL students with exceptionalities are ideal.

4. Acceptable 34.8 points

Recommendations for how to collaborate with ELL families in meeting the needs of

ELL students with exceptionalities are solid.

3. Approaching 29.6 points

Recommendations for how to collaborate with ELL families in meeting the needs of

ELL students with exceptionalities are weak.

2. Insufficient 27.6 points

Recommendations for how to collaborate with ELL families in meeting the needs of

ELL students with exceptionalities are unfitting.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Presentation 10 points

Criteria Description

Presentation

5. Target 10 points

The work is well presented. The overall appearance is neat and professional. Work

would be highly desirable for public dissemination.

4. Acceptable 8.7 points

The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor organizational flaws.

Work would be desirable for public dissemination.

3. Approaching 7.4 points

The work is somewhat disheveled and includes several organizational flaws. Work

would barely be presentable for public dissemination.

2. Insufficient 6.9 points

The work is sloppy or chaotic. Work would not be presentable for public

dissemination.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Title Slide, Slide Notes, and Research Citations 10 points

Criteria Description

Title Slide, Slide Notes, and Research Citations

5. Target 10 points

Title slide and thorough slide notes are present. In-text citations and a reference

slide are complete and correct. Sources are credible. The documentation of cited

sources is free of error.

4. Acceptable 8.7 points

Title slide and slide notes are present. In-text citations have few errors. References

used are reliable and reference slide lists all cited sources with few errors.

3. Approaching 7.4 points

Title slide, and/or slide notes, and/or reference slide are not present. Sources do

not fully support claims, or sources are not all credible. Sources are documented,

although several errors are present.

2. Insufficient 6.9 points

No title slide or slide notes are present. Reference slide includes errors and/or

inconsistently used citations. Sources are noncredible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 10 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 10 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes are free of mechanical errors. Skilled control of

sentence structure is used throughout.

4. Acceptable 8.7 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include a few mechanical errors. Suitable

sentence structure is used.

3. Approaching 7.4 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include frequent and repetitive mechanical

errors. Inconsistencies in sentence structure are recurrent.

2. Insufficient 6.9 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include errors in grammar or syntax that are

pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect sentence structure errors are found

throughout.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Total 200 points

https://www.gce.com/