Session 5: Online Journal 5.2: Reflect and Respond

Due No Due Date
Points 6
Submitting a text entry box or a file upload

Review the texts you have assembled so far (using worksheets from sessions 1, 2, and 3). Choose three resources from your list to use to observe children’s ability to apply the word-solving strategies that you have taught. Then, in your online journal, describe how you would use these resources to gather information about children’s word-solving abilities. Also explain why these particular resources are likely to provide trustworthy information about the students’ reading abilities.

Rubric

Title:

Session 5: Online Journal 5.1 Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Content Knowledge and Critical Analysis

view longer description

threshold: pts

Edit criterion description

EXPERT: Provides a clear, accurate explanation of the characteristics of trustworthy assessment with strong rationale from lectures and readings.

3.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

DEVELOPING: Provides a clear, accurate definition of the characteristics of effective intervention. Includes a partial rationale from lectures and readings.

2.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

EMERGING: Provides a partial definition of the characteristics of effective intervention without a strong rationale.

1.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

INADEQUATE: Did not post or post did not address this criterion.

0.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

pts

3.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Connections to Content from Prior Sessions

view longer description

threshold: pts

Edit criterion description

EXPERT: Accurately describes at least two examples of the relationship between trustworthy assessment and children’s opportunities to develop foundational reading abilities (i.e., oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics). Supports description by citing specific evidence from lectures and readings in previous sessions.

3.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

DEVELOPING: Accurately describes at least two examples of the relationship between trustworthy assessment and children’s opportunities to develop foundational reading abilities (i.e., oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics). Supports one but not both examples by citing evidence from lectures or readings in previous sessions.

2.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

EMERGING: Accurately describes one example of the relationship between trustworthy assessment and children’s opportunities to develop foundational reading abilities (i.e., oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics). Supports example by citing evidence from lectures or readings in previous sessions.

1.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

INADEQUATE: Did not post or post did not address this criterion.

0.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

pts

3.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Connections to the Classroom

view longer description

threshold: pts

Edit criterion description

EXPERT: Provides a clear, thorough analysis of literacy assessments in own classroom and district/school in comparison to the characteristics of trustworthy assessment, backed by evidence from lectures or readings.

3.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

DEVELOPING: Provides a partial analysis of literacy assessments in own classroom and district/school in comparison to the characteristics of trustworthy assessment. ● May or may not be backed by evidence from lectures or readings.

2.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

EMERGING: Provides some analysis of literacy assessments in own classroom and district/school without details or strong rationale.

1.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

INADEQUATE: Did not post or post did not address this criterion.

0.0 pts

Edit rating Delete rating Add new rating category after current rating

pts

3.0 pts

Total Points: 9.0 out of 9.0

Criterion Find Outcome