Click for rubric for Part I & Part III

Rubric for Part II: The Plan, Its Implementation and Evaluation: How Well Did It Work?

Minimum criteria, without which no credit will be given:

____All parts are included (description, plan, 3-part plan review)

____Analysis of plan implementation uses and cites readings

____Paper is free of spelling and grammatical errors.

Scoring Rules: Each description illustrates the characteristics of work at that score level. Not all papers will match a description exactly.

NOTE: Plan will be evaluated using the Part I rubric.

4.0

Description includes all information requested. Plan review addresses the questions provided in the directions. Review uses data from the field (e.g., observations, notes, CT/US feedback, questionnaire data, etc.) to illustrate and support your evaluation. Review analyzes expected vs. observed results of using the strategies, using important ideas and theories from course readings to make and support (or contrast to) your interpretation. Use of readings shows a strong grasp of the ideas and theories used. Implications for your future teaching, including strategies you might try in the spring or fall, are well-articulated and supported by your analysis.

3.5

Description includes all information requested. Plan review addresses the questions provided in the directions. Review uses data from the field (e.g., observations, notes, CT/US feedback, questionnaire data, etc.) to illustrate and support your evaluation. Review analyzes expected vs. observed results of using the strategies, using ideas and theories from course readings to support (or contrast to) your interpretation, but analysis may depend too much on anecdotal evidence from readings rather than research-based ideas OR some connections may not be fully explained . Use of readings shows a good grasp of the ideas and theories used. Implications for your future teaching, including strategies you might try in the spring or fall, are well-articulated and supported by your analysis (including any theoretical ideas), though connections may be superficial in places .

3.0

Description includes all information requested. Plan review addresses most of the questions provided in the directions. Review uses data from the field (e.g., observations, notes, CT/US feedback, questionnaire data, etc.) to illustrate and support your evaluation, although the connection between data and conclusions may not always be clear . Review analyzes expected vs. observed results of using the strategies, using some ideas and theories from course readings to support (or contrast to) your interpretation, but may depend too much on anecdotal evidence from readings OR readings tend to be used in a "matching" fashion, as in "this is an example of stage-environment fit," with little additional explanation . Use of readings may show some minor misunderstandings. Implications for your future teaching, including strategies you might try in the spring or fall, are described, but their relationship to the analysis or readings may not be clearly specified .

2.0

Description includes most information requested. Plan review addresses most of the questions provided in the directions. Review uses some data from the field (e.g., observations, notes, CT/US feedback, questionnaire data, etc.) to illustrate and support your evaluation, although the connection between data and conclusions may not be clear . Analysis of expected vs. observed results of using the strategies makes superficial use of theories to explain the results; may demonstrate misunderstanding or misapplication of ideas . Implications for your future teaching, including strategies you might try in the spring or fall, are described, but their relationship to the analysis or readings may not be clear .

1.0

Description may be incomplete. Plan review addresses some questions provided in the directions. Data from the field is described, but analysis of expected vs. observed results of using the strategies makes little or only superficial use of theories to explain the results; demonstrates major misunderstanding or misapplication of ideas .