Draft rubric

A message from Steve

If you click on Discussions (the tab above), you'll see that I've started a number of different discussions around the rubric. These are all questions that have been asked during Week 5 ELPC G2 tutorials.

Please feel free to join in on any of these discussions and have your say before the rubric is finalized.

Or you might want to start a new discussion on a different aspect of the rubric.

I have responded to some of these questions, but not to others. The reason for this is that there are some questions that are being raised just to get more information (and I can respond by giving that information), and there are other questions that are being raised to express a concern (and I'd like to listen to the concern and to the discussion around those concerns before deciding whether to respond or to change the rubric).




FAIL
Unsatisfactory
PASS
Satisfactory
CREDIT
Good, sound
DISTINCTION
Superior, thoughtful
HIGH DISTINCTION
Outstanding, original
THE EVENT
Suitability of the incident as defined by the Essential Readings (10)
Inadequate implicit or explicit justification of the incident as an event.
Adequate implicit or explicit justification of the incident as an event.
.
Good implicit or explicit justification of the incident as an event.
Excellent implicit or explicit justification of the incident as an event.
Exemplary implicit or explicit justification of the incident as an event.
Context: school, community, students, curricular (10)
Inadequately described, with almost all relevant details missing
Adequately described, with some of the necessary details.
Described well, with sound and relevant details.
Described thoughtfully, with almost all relevant details.
Described comprehensively, with all relevant details.
Interactions: what the teacher said, did, acted and felt; how the students responded 10)
Few or no relevant details are present
Some relevant details are present.
Most relevant details are present.
Almost all relevant details are present.
All relevant details are present.
THE ANALYSIS
Unit sources used to inform the analysis (20)
Little or no material
Some relevant material
Sound and relevant material.
Thorough & detailed material.
Outstanding & original material.
At least three theories/perspectives (10)
Either absent or are inadequate.
These illuminate the analysis in an adequate way.
These illuminate the analysis in a sound way.
These illuminate the analysis thoroughly
These illuminated the analysis outstandingly
Identifies the strengths and/or weaknesses of how you handled the incident (10)
No convincing analysis of strengths and/or weaknesses
Some adequate analysis of strengths and/or weaknesses
Sound analysis of strengths and/or weaknesses
Thorough and thoughtful analysis of strengths and/or weaknesses
Outstanding and original analysis of strengths and/or weaknesses
Proposed alternatives and/or additional action for the future (10)
None
An adequate outline of what might be tried
A sound and useful description of what might be tried.
A thorough and convincing description of future possibilities
An outstanding and original analysis of future possibilities
COMMUNICATION
The way the ideas have been communicated (20)
There are significant difficulties for the audience.
The ideas have been communicated adequately.
The ideas have been communicated clearly.
The ideas have been communicated thoughtfully, effectively and clearly. The different ideas form a coherent whole.
The ideas have been communicated in an original and clear way. The author’s voice is present in an original and authentic way.