Custom written essays, Online classes handling, Proctored exams, Dissertation projects

 

Step standards 3-5 assessment description

 

 

Assessment Description

At this stage in the unit development, you have aligned student learning to state, national, and technology standards, and assessed your students’ knowledge and abilities related to your targeted content.

Collaborate with your cooperating teacher/mentor to design a unit of instruction that aligns to (Virginia Standards of Learning) state content standards. Include technology integration and demonstrate how you will differentiate your lessons to meet the needs of individual students. Implement your unit and analyze data to determine learning outcomes.

Follow the instructions found in the STEP Template. Complete STEP Standards 3-5 that includes the following:

• Assessment and Data Literacy
• Unit and Lesson planning
• Implementation of Instructional Unit: Create a video using any video recording device. Choose one of the lesson activities to video record a 5-10 minute segment to review and reflect on your teaching. Have your cooperating teacher/mentor review the recording and provide feedback, if possible.

APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Rubric

Collapse All RubricCollapse Allcollapse STEP 3: Pre-Assessment and Scoring Criteria assessment

STEP 3: Pre-Assessment and Scoring Criteria

2.5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 3: Pre-Assessment and Scoring Criteria

5. Target

2.5 points

Pre-test comprehensively identifies unit topics and realistically assesses student knowledge and abilities prior to instruction. Scoring criteria for measuring and categorizing how students performed on the pre-assessment are well organized and fair.

4. Acceptable

2.18 points

Pre-test clearly identifies unit topics and reasonably assesses student knowledge and abilities prior to instruction. Scoring criteria for measuring and categorizing how students performed on the pre-assessment are clear and reasonable.

3. Approaching

1.85 points

Pre-test inexplicitly identifies unit topics and minimally assesses student knowledge and abilities prior to instruction. Scoring criteria is partially incomplete or inconsistent in measuring student performance and distributing scores.

2. Insufficient

1.72 points

Pre-test is incomplete or inadequately identifies unit topics and fails to assess student knowledge and abilities prior to instruction. Scoring criteria is incomplete or flawed in measuring student performance and distributing scores.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 3: Pre-Assessment Data and Whole Class Analysis assessment

STEP 3: Pre-Assessment Data and Whole Class Analysis

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 3: Pre-Assessment Data and Whole Class Analysis

5. Target

5 points

Data presented in the table are clear and accurate. Proposed changes to standards, learning goals, and objectives are based on thoughtful data and advantageous for meeting student needs.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Data presented in the table are accurate. Proposed changes to standards, learning goals, and objectives are based on sound and reasonable data for meeting student needs.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Data presented in the table are lacking clarity and/or accuracy. Proposed changes to standards, learning goals, and objectives are based on partially incomplete data or do not fully address student needs.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Data presented in the table is unclear or inaccurate. Proposed changes to standards, learning goals, and objectives based on data are incomplete or inappropriate for meeting student needs.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Unit Alignment to Standards assessment

STEP 4: Unit Alignment to Standards

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Unit Alignment to Standards

5. Target

5 points

Unit plan thoroughly and comprehensively aligns to state content standards.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Unit plan accurately aligns to state content standards.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Unit plan minimally aligns to state content standards.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Unit plan is incorrectly aligned to state content standards.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Depth of Knowledge Lesson Questions assessment

STEP 4: Depth of Knowledge Lesson Questions

2.5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Depth of Knowledge Lesson Questions

5. Target

2.5 points

DOK questions reflect all four levels, and are meaningful, engaging, and ideal for the lesson content and developmental level of the students.

4. Acceptable

2.18 points

DOK questions reflect all four levels and are clear and appropriately robust for the lesson content and developmental level of the students.

3. Approaching

1.85 points

DOK questions may be missing one of the four levels. Questions are marginal for the lesson content and developmental level of the students.

2. Insufficient

1.72 points

DOK questions may be missing more than one of the four levels. Questions are inappropriate for the lesson content or developmental level of the students.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Multiple Means of Representation and Differentiation assessment

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Representation and Differentiation

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Representation and Differentiation

5. Target

5 points

Unit utilizes creative, quality instructional strategies, well-crafted to meet the students’ needs. Includes well-crafted differentiation to meet specific student needs.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Unit utilizes competent, detailed instructional strategies, appropriate in meeting the needs of the student. Includes substantive differentiation to meet specific student needs.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Unit utilizes overly simplistic instructional strategies, which vaguely meet the needs of the student. Includes adequate differentiation to meet specific student needs.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Unit utilizes ineffective instructional strategies that are inappropriate for meeting the needs of the student. Differentiation is inadequate for meeting specific student needs.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Multiple Means of Engagement and Differentiation assessment

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Engagement and Differentiation

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Engagement and Differentiation

5. Target

5 points

The means of engagement innovatively allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. Meaningfully addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined on the template.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

The means of engagement effectively allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. Appropriately addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined on the template.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

The means of engagement minimally allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. Unclearly addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined on the template.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

The means of engagement implausibly allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. Inadequately addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined on the template.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Multiple Means of Expression and Differentiation assessment

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Expression and Differentiation

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Multiple Means of Expression and Differentiation

5. Target

5 points

Unit includes compelling, proficient integration of both formative and summative assessment strategies to promote learning to meet student needs.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Unit includes reasonable integration of both formative and summative assessment strategies to promote learning with detailed consideration to meet student needs.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Unit includes ambiguous integration of both formative and summative assessment strategies to promote learning to meet student needs.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Unit includes ineffective integration of both formative and summative assessment strategies to promote learning to meet student needs.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 4: Extension/Home Activity assessment

STEP 4: Extension/Home Activity

2.5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 4: Extension/Home Activity

5. Target

2.5 points

Summary skillfully explains a proficient plan to involve the student’s parents in meeting her goals. At-home activity included is thoughtful and specifically connected to insightfully helping the student practice and master new skills and generalize learning outside of the classroom.

4. Acceptable

2.18 points

Summary clearly explains a sound plan to involve the student’s parents in meeting her goals. At-home activity included is detailed and directly linked to solidly helping the student practice and master new skills and generalize learning outside of the classroom.

3. Approaching

1.85 points

Summary inconsistently explains an elementary plan to involve the student’s parents in meeting her goals. At-home activity included does not demonstrate best practices in helping the student practice and master new skills and generalize learning outside of the classroom.

2. Insufficient

1.72 points

Summary unintelligibly explains a flawed plan to involve the student’s parents in meeting her goals. At-home activity included is unrelated to helping the student practice and master new skills and generalize learning outside of the classroom.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 5: Summary of Unit Implementation assessment

STEP 5: Summary of Unit Implementation

2.5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 5: Summary of Unit Implementation

5. Target

2.5 points

Summary skillfully summarizes the execution of each lesson activity as well as the engagement strategies and their effectiveness in fostering the learning goals.

4. Acceptable

2.18 points

Summary appropriately summarizes the execution of each lesson activity as well as the engagement strategies and their usefulness in fostering the learning goals.

3. Approaching

1.85 points

Summary is missing key details of lesson activities as well as the engagement strategies and their usefulness in fostering the learning goals.

2. Insufficient

1.72 points

Summary of lesson activities and overall perception of student learning is unintelligible.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 5: Summary of Student Learning assessment

STEP 5: Summary of Student Learning

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 5: Summary of Student Learning

5. Target

5 points

Summary of student learning is thoughtful and original. Instructional changes based on student responses are thoroughly described and their effect on student learning is comprehensively explained.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Summary of student learning is logical and relevant. Instructional changes based on student responses are clearly described and their effect on student learning is concisely explained.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Summary of student learning is underdeveloped. Instructional changes based on student responses are unclearly described and their effect on student learning is shallowly explained.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Summary of student learning is undeveloped. Instructional changes based on student responses are imprecisely described and their effect on student learning is inadequately explained.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse STEP 5: Reflection of Video Recording assessment

STEP 5: Reflection of Video Recording

5 points

Criteria Description

STEP 5: Reflection of Video Recording

5. Target

5 points

Reflection after viewing video recording is exceptional. Personal improvement is realistic and demonstrates best practices for a professional educator. Personal strength is thoughtful and future considerations are compelling.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Reflection after viewing video recording is credible. Personal improvement is appropriate. Personal strength is clear and future considerations are sound.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Reflection after viewing video recording is unfocused. Personal improvement is ambiguous. Personal strength is lacking detail and future considerations are inexplicit.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Reflection after viewing video recording is erroneous. Personal improvement is insufficient. Personal strength is irrelevant and future considerations are implausible.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

collapse Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) assessment

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)

5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)

5. Target

5 points

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.

4. Acceptable

4.35 points

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Varieties of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some practice and content-related language.

3. Approaching

3.7 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.

2. Insufficient

3.45 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.

1. No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.