I need help with home work

Rubric Criteria

expand all Rubric CriteriaExpand All

AZ EL Definition and Demographic/Home Language Composition

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is comprehensive and precise. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is comprehensive.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is accurate and includes relevant details. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is clear and detailed.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is somewhat inaccurate and lacks detail. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is generally clear but missing key details.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is partially incomplete with inaccuracies or omissions. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is unclear with limited details.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is incomplete or inaccurate. Fails to include demographic or home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona.

Structured English Immersion in AZ and Sheltered English Instruction

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Thoroughly describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes meaningful distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Clearly describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes noteworthy distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Partially describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes some distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Inadequately describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes little to no distinction from sheltered English instruction.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to describe structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and its distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

AZ LDA: Principles and Research

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Provides a well-rounded and comprehensive description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, and seamlessly includes a thorough synthesis of research around ELs.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Provides a complete and detailed description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, and clearly includes a significant synthesis of research around ELs.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Provides a basic or mostly complete description of the Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, but lacks depth or integration in the synthesis of research around ELs.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Provides a flawed or partially incomplete description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, with significant inaccuracies or omissions in the synthesis of research around ELs.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to describe Arizona's Language Development Approach, its principles, or the synthesis of research around ELs.

Student Agency

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Provides a sophisticated explanation of student agency and makes substantial connections to its importance in EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Provides a proper explanation of student agency and makes solid connections to its importance in EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Provides a cursory explanation of student agency with few connections to its importance to EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Provides a poor explanation of student agency with limited relevance to EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to explain student agency or its importance in EL instruction. Does not include mention of self-determination, a sense of voice, or confidence.

SEI Models

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Comprehensively discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Clearly discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Broadly discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Inadequately discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to discuss components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

Program Eligibility and AZELLA

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Thoroughly discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and proficiently refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Specifically discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Effectively discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and appropriately refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Clearly discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Vaguely discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and generally refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Minimally discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Insufficiently discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona or inappropriately refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Unclearly discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to discuss the EL program eligibility process in Arizona. Does not refer to the Home Language Survey or AZELLA. Fails to discuss how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

Parents'/Guardians' Rights

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Comprehensively describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Accurately describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Generally describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Imprecisely describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Inaccurately describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

Summary

22 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

22 points

Substantially summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are sophisticated.

4. Acceptable

19.14 points

Suitably summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are sound.

3. Approaching

16.28 points

Cursorily summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are underdeveloped.

2. Insufficient

15.18 points

Inadequately summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are unreasonable.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Erroneously summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Fails to include collaboration plans to support EL students.

Professionalism

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Manner exhibits a high degree of professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is superior and completely free of distraction.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Manner exhibits appropriate professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is appropriate and relatively free of distraction.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Manner within the recording is marginally professional. The background or environment of the recording detracts from the message.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Manner within the recording is lacking professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is distracting.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Manner within the recording is not professional; or the background or environment of the recording is inappropriate.

Presentation of Content

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Presentation appearance is exceptional and professionally communicates the message of the product. Work would be exemplary for public dissemination.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Presentation appearance is appropriate and enhances the message of the product. Work would be desirable for public dissemination.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Presentation appearance and organization is generally acceptable. Work would be adequate for public dissemination.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Presentation of content is not neat or organized. Work would not be presentable for public dissemination.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Presentation of content is unfitting for the assignment.

Supporting Research and Documentation of Sources

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate designated style and formatting to document sources in citations and references.

5. Target

5.5 points

Supporting research is compelling and thorough. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Supporting research is credible and relevant. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Supporting research is minimal and somewhat inaccurate. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor formatting errors are present.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Supporting research is limited or insufficient. Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Supporting research is not included or is irrelevant to the topic. Appropriate format is not used.

Mechanics of Writing

5.5 points

Total110 points

Rubric Criteria

expand all Rubric CriteriaExpand All

AZ EL Definition and Demographic/Home Language Composition

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is comprehensive and precise. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is comprehensive.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is accurate and includes relevant details. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is clear and detailed.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is somewhat inaccurate and lacks detail. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is generally clear but missing key details.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is partially incomplete with inaccuracies or omissions. Summary of the demographic and home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona is unclear with limited details.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of Arizona's definition of an English learner is incomplete or inaccurate. Fails to include demographic or home language composition of the PK-12 EL population in Arizona.

Structured English Immersion in AZ and Sheltered English Instruction

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Thoroughly describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes meaningful distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Clearly describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes noteworthy distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Partially describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes some distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Inadequately describes structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and includes little to no distinction from sheltered English instruction.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to describe structured English immersion as it is used in Arizona and its distinctions from sheltered English instruction.

AZ LDA: Principles and Research

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Provides a well-rounded and comprehensive description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, and seamlessly includes a thorough synthesis of research around ELs.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Provides a complete and detailed description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, and clearly includes a significant synthesis of research around ELs.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Provides a basic or mostly complete description of the Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, but lacks depth or integration in the synthesis of research around ELs.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Provides a flawed or partially incomplete description of Arizona's Language Development Approach, including its principles, with significant inaccuracies or omissions in the synthesis of research around ELs.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to describe Arizona's Language Development Approach, its principles, or the synthesis of research around ELs.

Student Agency

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Provides a sophisticated explanation of student agency and makes substantial connections to its importance in EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Provides a proper explanation of student agency and makes solid connections to its importance in EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Provides a cursory explanation of student agency with few connections to its importance to EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Provides a poor explanation of student agency with limited relevance to EL instruction, including supporting self-determination, a sense of voice, and confidence.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to explain student agency or its importance in EL instruction. Does not include mention of self-determination, a sense of voice, or confidence.

SEI Models

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Comprehensively discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Clearly discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Broadly discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Inadequately discusses components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to discuss components of Arizona's approved research-based SEI models: newcomer, pull-out, two-hour, and 50-50 dual language immersion.

Program Eligibility and AZELLA

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Thoroughly discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and proficiently refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Specifically discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Effectively discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and appropriately refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Clearly discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Vaguely discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona and generally refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Minimally discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Insufficiently discusses the EL program eligibility process in Arizona or inappropriately refers to the Home Language Survey and AZELLA. Unclearly discusses how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fails to discuss the EL program eligibility process in Arizona. Does not refer to the Home Language Survey or AZELLA. Fails to discuss how the AZELLA is used for both placement and reassessment and its standard accommodations.

Parents'/Guardians' Rights

11 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

11 points

Comprehensively describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

4. Acceptable

9.57 points

Accurately describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

3. Approaching

8.14 points

Generally describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

2. Insufficient

7.59 points

Imprecisely describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Inaccurately describes parents'/guardians' rights regarding EL services.

Summary

22 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

22 points

Substantially summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are sophisticated.

4. Acceptable

19.14 points

Suitably summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are sound.

3. Approaching

16.28 points

Cursorily summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are underdeveloped.

2. Insufficient

15.18 points

Inadequately summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Collaboration plans to support EL students are unreasonable.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Erroneously summarizes research-based best practices and foundational principles needed to instruct ELs and the importance of properly identifying ELs and their needs to ensure they receive appropriate services and supports. Fails to include collaboration plans to support EL students.

Professionalism

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Manner exhibits a high degree of professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is superior and completely free of distraction.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Manner exhibits appropriate professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is appropriate and relatively free of distraction.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Manner within the recording is marginally professional. The background or environment of the recording detracts from the message.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Manner within the recording is lacking professionalism. The background or environment of the recording is distracting.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Manner within the recording is not professional; or the background or environment of the recording is inappropriate.

Presentation of Content

5.5 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

5.5 points

Presentation appearance is exceptional and professionally communicates the message of the product. Work would be exemplary for public dissemination.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Presentation appearance is appropriate and enhances the message of the product. Work would be desirable for public dissemination.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Presentation appearance and organization is generally acceptable. Work would be adequate for public dissemination.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Presentation of content is not neat or organized. Work would not be presentable for public dissemination.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Presentation of content is unfitting for the assignment.

Supporting Research and Documentation of Sources

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate designated style and formatting to document sources in citations and references.

5. Target

5.5 points

Supporting research is compelling and thorough. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable

4.79 points

Supporting research is credible and relevant. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching

4.07 points

Supporting research is minimal and somewhat inaccurate. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor formatting errors are present.

2. Insufficient

3.8 points

Supporting research is limited or insufficient. Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Supporting research is not included or is irrelevant to the topic. Appropriate format is not used.

Mechanics of Writing

5.5 points

Total110 points