Benchmark – Summative Examination

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points

SPD-500 SPD-500-O503 Benchmark – Summative Examination 300.0

Criteria Percentage No Submission (0.00%) Insufficient (69.00%) Approaching (74.00%) Acceptable (87.00%) Target (100.00%) Comments Points Earned

Group 1 100.0%

Christian Worldview Perspective and Respecting Students 20.0% Not addressed. Discussion of how Christian worldview perspective can be demonstrated in professional practice, including explanation of why teachers need to respect the individual strengths, interests, and needs of student to promote growth and potential, is poor and lacks details. Discussion of how Christian worldview perspective can be demonstrated in professional practice, including explanation of why teachers need to respect the individual strengths, interests, and needs of student to promote growth and potential, is minimal and missing key details. Discussion of how Christian worldview perspective can be demonstrated in professional practice, including explanation of why teachers need to respect the individual strengths, interests, and needs of student to promote growth and potential, is sound and includes relevant details. Discussion of how Christian worldview perspective can be demonstrated in professional practice, including explanation of why teachers need to respect the individual strengths, interests, and needs of student to promote growth and potential, is thorough and includes substantial details.

Language, Culture, and Family Background (C1.1) 20.0% Not addressed. Explanation of how language, culture, and family background influence student learning is incomplete. Explanation of how language, culture, and family background influence student learning is underdeveloped. Explanation of how language, culture, and family background influence student learning is complete. Explanation of how language, culture, and family background influence student learning is extensive.

Specially Designed Instructional Strategies (C.1.2) 20.0% Not addressed. The three research-based, specially designed instructional strategies that can be used to respond to the developmental differences and individual needs of the student is incorrect and/or inappropriate for the student. The three research-based, specially designed instructional strategies that can be used to respond to the developmental differences and individual needs of the student are vague and do not demonstrate best practices. The three research-based, specially designed instructional strategies that can be used to respond to developmental differences and individual needs are appropriate for the student. The three research-based, specially designed instructional strategies that can be used to respond to developmental differences and individual needs are well-crafted for the student.

Strategy Justification 15.0% Not addressed. Cited research and justification of how selected strategies provide specially designed instruction and access to the general education curriculum and standards as required by IDEA are insufficient and lack reason. Cited research and justification of how selected strategies provide specially designed instruction and access to the general education curriculum and standards as required by IDEA are weak and identify few connections. Cited research and justification of how selected strategies provide specially designed instruction and access to the general education curriculum and standards as required by IDEA are logical and reasonable. Cited research and justification of how selected strategies provide specially designed instruction and access to the general education curriculum and standards as required by IDEA are excellent and draw complex connections.

Thesis Development and Purpose 5.0% Not addressed. Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is underdeveloped or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction 5.0% Not addressed. 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 shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Not addressed. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some 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.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Not addressed. 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 fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Not addressed. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor 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%