essay paper
I’m working on the chart so I don’t need that done. I just need the summary done.
Consider the constructivist and explicit instruction views of teaching reading.
Develop a chart that compares and contrasts the two views. Include two to three reading activities for each philosophy and two to three assessments that correlate with each philosophy.
Write a summary essay of 1,000-1,250 words in which you describe both approaches and documents the approach that you prefer.
Use the Library to research a minimum of five peer-reviewed articles that can be used in support of your content.
Reading Philosophies
|
|
1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% |
2 Less Than Satisfactory 65.00% |
3 Satisfactory 75.00% |
4 Good 85.00% |
5 Excellent 100.00% |
|
|
70.0 %Content |
|
|||||
|
25.0 % Comparison Chart of Constructivist vs. Explicit |
Comparison is not discussed. The activities and assessments are missing. |
Comparison is inadequately discussed. The activities and assessments are missing or incomplete. |
Comparison is adequate. The activities and assessments are present. |
Comparison is clear and coherent. The activities and assessments are properly aligned with the corresponding philosophies. |
Comparison is clear, coherent and cohesive. The activities and assessments are properly aligned with the corresponding philosophies. Higher-order thinking is evident. |
|
|
45.0 % Summary Essay |
The description of the philosophies and personal preference is missing or incomplete. Research is not evident. |
The description of the philosophies and personal preference is incomplete. Fewer than five sources are used. |
The description of the philosophies and personal preference is complete. At least five references are cited. |
The description of the philosophies and personal preference is clear and coherent. Five or more references are cited. |
The description of the philosophies and personal preference is clear, coherent, and cohesive. Five or more references are cited. Higher-order thinking is evident. |
|
|
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness |
|
|||||
|
7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose |
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. |
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. |
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. |
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. |
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
|
|
8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction |
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. |
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. |
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument supports the purpose logically but not thoroughly. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. |
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
|
|
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
|
|
10.0 %Format |
|
|||||
|
5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Appropriate template is used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
|
|
5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) |
No reference page is included. No citations are used. |
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. |
Reference page lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present |
Reference page is inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. |
In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
|
|
100 % Total Weightage |
|
|