Kent’s

You are to create an original assessment based on the information presented in this course about the Kent State shooting of May 14, 1970. Your assessment will consist of multiple-choice questions, constructed-response questions. Complete instructions are located in the Appendix section .

ASSESSING STUDENT

LEARNING

EDU 6

Online Studies Student Syllabus

Updated: July 29, 2024

Course Description

This course addresses the critical examination of instructional assessment measures,

encompassing traditional assessment methods, norm/criterion-referenced testing, and alternative

assessment approaches such as performance assessment, portfolio assessment, and product

assessment. Through rigorous inquiry and analysis, students gain a comprehensive understanding

of the theoretical underpinnings and practical applications of these assessment modalities.

Moreover, the course emphasizes the utilization of assessment data to inform instructional

decision-making processes, equipping candidates with the skills necessary to effectively evaluate

student learning outcomes and drive continuous improvement in educational practices.

Candidate Competencies
• Explore traditional and alternative methods of student assessment

(InTASC 8)

• Write goals and objectives for content-area concepts (InTASC 7)

• Write good test questions with appropriate rigor, variety in format, and adherence with

good test question principles (InTASC 8)

• Create and use high-quality analytic rubrics (InTASC 8)

• Conduct item analysis of student assessment results and develop a plan for

addressing

identified areas of weakness (InTASC 8)

• Analyze student work samples and, distinguishing between process and content, develop

a plan for remediation and/or intervention (InTASC 8)

• Analyze standardized test score reports and develop a progress monitoring system for key

students (InTASC 8)

• Explore the use of technology to create and administer assessments and manage results

(InTASC 8)

Assessment Criteria

Assignments Weight

Writing Assignments 30%

Discussion Questions 20%

Quizzes 10%

Final Projects 40%

Total 100%

Grading Scale:

930+ A 93-100%

900-929 A- 90-92%

870-899 B+ 87-89%

830-869 B 83-86%

800-829 B- 80-82%

770-799 C+ 77-79%

700-769 C 70-76%

670-699 D+ 67-69%

630-669 D 63-66%

600-629 D- 60-62%

0-599 F 0-59%

Resource Inventory

NO TEXTBOOK REQUIRED FOR THIS COURSE

The Holy Bible

Research Articles: Locate articles by accessing the Belhaven Library Online

http://belhaven.libguides.com/az.php

Reading Assignments

Used as references for Final Project 1:

• Song: Ohio by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young (1970).

o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRE9vMBBe10

• Newsweek Archived Article – only available online

o http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-1970-coverage-kent-

state-32810

• Article summaries of Kent State (only available online)

o http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting (article and Nixon speech)

o https://www.ohiohistory.org/tag/kent-state-shooting/

http://belhaven.libguides.com/az.php

http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-1970-coverage-kent-state-328108

http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting

https://www.ohiohistory.org/tag/kent-state-shooting/

Expectations of Online Studies Education Candidates

Attendance

Attendance will be recorded online by Tuesday of each unit for the preceding unit. Students are

to be marked as present if they interact with the course by submitting a paper, posting to a

discussion forum, or taking a quiz. If the student performs any of these elements, he or she is to

be marked present for that week. If not, the student is marked absent. Viewing a lecture does not

constitute attendance for a student.

Due Dates

A unit is considered to be Monday – Saturday. You are encouraged to “Observe the Sabbath day

and keep it holy” (Exodus 20:8). Good time management is essential to career and academic

success. Early submissions of assignments and discussion responses are encouraged. Please get

in touch with your instructor for guidance on the submission of late assignments. Due dates are

posted to the assignments.

Communication

Communicate questions related to the course directly to the professor, except in cases where you

need to contact technical support. Your Belhaven University email address will be utilized for

the class, so check it frequently.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Belhaven University offers students disability accommodation in accordance with the guidelines

of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The student must make his or her disability known to the

Office of Student Care, provide current documentation of the disability from an appropriate

licensed professional, and complete the Belhaven ADA Request Form for accommodation. The

student must provide such a request to the Office of Student Care at least two weeks prior to the

beginning of each semester for which the accommodation is requested. Approved

accommodations will be communicated to the student and made within a reasonable time period

after completion of the official request. Students must present their official accommodations

letter to the instructor of each course they are enrolled in to receive the accommodations. Apply

under the Quick Links on the Student Life/Services tab.

Required Formatting

The required formatting for your papers, assignments, projects, discussions, or anything else that

may be research-based is the latest Publication Manual of the American Psychological

Association (APA). APA information can be located on your Canvas course page by clicking on

Academic Resources and then Academic Help and APA Resources. The only exception to this is

the Bible courses, which use Chicago Turabian formatting. Help for this formatting is also

available in the Academic Help and Resources.

Responsible Research

Responsible research is a critical component of education, and any individual conducting

research must learn how to investigate, read, understand, synthesize, interpret, and finally

explain complex ideas and issues in writing. An individual conducting research must also

understand that ideas found in literature, media presentations, interviews, or any other form of

https://www.belhaven.edu/university-life/care/ada.html

media do not belong to the researcher and, therefore, must be given credit through proper

documentation. It is required that every person conducting research provides proper credit

through the correct use of documentation not only to prevent plagiarism but also to demonstrate

respect to the idea’s originator. To ensure that all papers possess originality, faculty members

will use Turnitin. Any paper exceeding 20% of non-original material or noticeable

undocumented information will be subject to a discount in points at the discretion of the faculty.

Originality

Writing assignments will be evaluated for originality using Turnitin. Belhaven University

encourages a high degree of originality in writing. Quoted material should seldom be used

and

must be limited to phrases that cannot be paraphrased or summarized without losing

effectiveness. Students must cite and reference all sources of information and images using APA

style. APA information can be located on your Canvas course page by clicking on Academic

Resources and then Academic Help and APA Resources. Non-originality exceeding 20% on

papers will be subject to a grade discount at the professor’s discretion, or referred back to the

student to redo the assignment, and students may be referred to a writing lab for assistance with

originality.

Graduate School of Education Policy on Use of Generative Artificial

Intelligence (AI)
for MAT, M.Ed. and Ed.S. Candidates

It is the responsibility of the Graduate School of Education to prepare teacher and administrator

candidates that:

– Communicate effectively in the school setting with parents, students, educational

professionals, and the community at large;

and

– Utilize instructional strategies that will yield students that are strong thinkers, writers, and

leaders.

To accomplish this, it is imperative that degree candidates are required to address challenging

writing prompts and produce documents that adequately address the problem posed.

Hence, candidates for the masters and specialist degree programs in education at Belhaven

University will NOT be allowed to utilize Artificial Intelligence for creation of responses to

ANY course assignments since practice in creation of original works is necessary preparation for

those responsible for training young children, adolescents, and teachers to be critical thinkers,

writers, and problem solvers.

***It is expected that all assignments are produced by the candidates themselves. Use of a

generative AI tool to create a response to an assignment constitutes academic dishonesty and will

be reported as an Honor Code violation. The BU School of Education reserves the right to

require a demonstration of learning at any time.

Key Reminders

• Do not attempt to get a research paper from the Internet (or anywhere else) and submit as

your paper. This is dishonest and unethical.

• Do not copy from any book, article, or encyclopedia, and submit this for your paper. This

is not acceptable research.

• Include references (including source and page numbers) that document every source upon

which you have in any way relied for each paragraph of your paper. If sources are not

properly referenced, the student has cheated the sources out of deserved credit and

cheated readers out of valuable information.

• Do not use material from any other student’s paper or work unless you give that student

full credit in reference notes.

Summary of Assignments

Writing Assignments

Writing assignments must use APA-compliant formatting and include a title page, appropriate

citations, and references. Each will be evaluated using the individual assignment rubrics located

in the module appendices. Assignments are due no later than 11:59 p.m. (CT) on Saturday.

Earlier submissions are encouraged.

Discussion Questions

Discussion questions are available on the first day of each week. You should respond to the

initial discussion questions no later than 11:59 p.m. (CT) each subsequent

Wednesday. Responses to classmates’ discussion questions are due Saturday at 11:59 p.m. for

each unit. Early postings are encouraged. Initial discussion question responses must be 250 –

300 words each. A response to a classmate must be at least 100 words. Fewer than this will

automatically result in a significant reduction in one’s grade. Three responses to classmates’

postings are required.

You must mention the person’s name to whose comments you are responding and quote what

aspect of his or her post you are addressing. Without either, it is not possible to see the direction

of your comments, and the comments will not receive any points.

Quizzes

Candidates will complete quizzes on all reading assignments and lectures. Quizzes are available

once all week lectures have been viewed. Quizzes must be completed by Saturday at 11:59 p.m.

(CT).

Final Project

The Final Project components must be completed to receive a grade for the course. Failure to

complete the Final Project will result in a final grade of F, no matter what grade you had prior to

those Final Project components being due.

Projects 1 and 2: Kent State Shooting Assessment **Due UNIT 7**

You are to create an original assessment based on the information presented in this course

about the Kent State shooting of May 14, 1970. Your assessment will consist of multiple-

choice questions, constructed-response questions, and essay with rubric. Complete

instructions are located in the Appendix. Grading is via

checklist and rubric.

• Project 1 – Assessment: 200

points

• Project 2 – Reflection on Assessment: 200 points

Unit One

Topics

• Purpose of Evaluation

• Formative and Summative Evaluation

• Functions of Achievement tests

• Kinds of Achievement tests

• Principles of High Quality Assessment

• Role of Measurement and Assessment in Teaching

Reading Assignments

• DeLuca, C., & Bellara, A. (2013). The current state of assessment education: Aligning

policy, standards, and teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 356-372.

• Long, M. (2011). Chapter 3: Assessment. In The psychology of education. EBSCO

Publishing: eBook Collection EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/26/2017 10:28 PM via

BELHAVEN UNIVERSITY and available in

Canvas.

• Wallace, V. L., & Husid, W. N. (2011). Chapter 7: Assessments. In Collaborating for

inquiry-based learning: School librarians and teachers partner for student achievement.

EBSCO Publishing: eBook Collection EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/26/2017 10:56 PM

via BELHAVEN UNIVERSITY and available in Canvas.

View Lecture – Unit 1

TAKE QUIZ 1

Discussion Question: (10

points)

Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• How do you currently use formative assessment in your classroom? What is one area where

you are proud of your use? Discuss one area where you would like to improve, and discuss

your goals for how this course can help you achieve your goal.

Writing Assignment (45 points): Submit by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Select and critique one peer-reviewed article from a professional journal (no older than

six years) related to assessment, assessment instruments, ethics, or test development

which includes a statistical analysis. Follow APA 7th edition format when writing your

review. Attach a hard copy of the full-text article with your paper where indicated in

Canvas. See the scoring guide in Appendix B for full details.

• Requirements:

When addressing the questions asked in the scoring guide, cite

evidence

from your article as support for your statements. For example, when addressing the

question “Were data qualitative or quantitative?” a simple statement that the data were

quantitative is not sufficient to receive the score point. How do you know the data were

quantitative? What evidence from the article lets you know the data were quantitative?

Reference specific sections, tables, paragraphs, etc., from the article as support for your

statement. (It is possible to answer each question in the scoring guide within one or two

well-constructed sentences. Each subsection in part B can be answered within one or two

paragraphs.)

Unit Two

Topics

• Various Worldviews

• Cognitive, Psychomotor, Affective Domains

• Goals and Objectives

• Types and Formats of Assessments

Reading Assignments

• Bixler, B. (2014). The ABCDs of writing instructional objectives. (Available in Canvas

reading assignments)

• Harada, V. H., & Yoshina, J. M. (2010). Chapter 3 Tools for assessment: Checklists,

rubrics, and rating scales. In Assessing for learning: Librarians and teachers as partners

(2nd ed., Rev. and Expanded). EBSCO Publishing: eBook Collection EBSCOhost) –

printed on 12/26/2017 10:28 PM via BELHAVEN UNIVERSITY and available in

Canvas.

• Writing instructional goals and objectives. (Available in Canvas reading assignments)

View Lecture – Unit 2

TAKE QUIZ 2

Discussion Question: (10 points) Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Reflect on the alternative worldviews (not the Christian worldview) presented in this

week’s lecture. Where have you experienced tenets of these worldviews in action? Did

any of the tenets surprise you as being non-Christian in origin? What are some ways you

can counter the influence of these worldviews on those with whom you come in contact

or teach?

Writing Assignment: (50 points) Due by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Select a state standard in your area of teaching expertise (your goal). Write cognitive,

psychomotor, and affective objectives that address your selected standard. Each

objective must address some specific aspect of your standard. See the Appendix for the

template and scoring guide.

• Requirements:

o Properly formatted cover page; template (except for key) double-spaced (3-point

deduction if not followed)

o Standard copied and pasted from the MDE standards document

o Grade level and subject area identified

o Each objective color-coded in a manner similar to that shown in the lecture

o Key to color-coding provided

o Cognitive Domain – 2 well-written objectives (10 points)

o Psychomotor Domain – 2 well-written objectives

(10

points)

o Affective Domain – 2 well-written objectives

(10 points)

Reminder: Final Projects 1 and 2 are due UNIT 7. The resources you will use in the creation

of your assessment are the following:

• Song: Ohio by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young (1970).

• Newsweek Archived Article – only available online

o http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-1970-coverage-kent-

state-328108

• Article summaries of Kent State (only available online)

o http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting (article and Nixon speech)

o http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Kent_State_Shootings

http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-1970-coverage-kent-state-328108

http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Kent_State_Shootings

Unit Three

Topics

• Depth of Knowledge

• Designing a test that measures what you want measured

• Writing good multiple-choice questions

• Writing good constructed-response questions

• Writing good essay questions

• Formative Assessments

• Technology and Assessments

• What is an Item Analysis?

• How do you conduct an Item Analysis?

• What is the Code of Ethical Responsibilities in Assessment

Reading Assignments

• Clay, B. (2001). Is this a trick question? A short guide to writing effective test questions.

Kansas Curriculum Center. Retrieved from https://www.k-

state.edu/ksde/alp/resources/Handout-Module6

• Lau, P. N. K., Lau, S. H., Hong, K. S., & Usop, J. (2011). Guessing, partial knowledge,

and misconceptions in multiple choice tests. Educational Technology & Society, 14(4),

99-110.

• Webb, N. (2002). Depth of knowledge levels for four content areas. (Available in Canvas

reading assignments)

View Lecture – Unit 3

TAKE QUIZ 3

Discussion Question (10 points) Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Take the “Quiz with No Content” that’s associated with this prompt. Discuss your results

– how well did you do? Which of the multiple-choice test writing traps caught you?

Which did you recognize? How can this “quiz” help you when you write your own

multiple-choice test questions?

Writing Assignment: Writing Quiz Questions (50 points) Due by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Using two of the required resources for your Final Project 1, write a multiple-choice

question at a DOK level of analysis/application or higher (refer to the Test Taxonomy

article for guidance) and one constructed-response question that requires the answer to

include text-based evidence. Be sure to answer this question with a response that would

earn top scores. These questions may be used as part of your Final Project 1.

• Requirements:

https://www.k-state.edu/ksde/alp/resources/Handout-Module6

o One high-level multiple-choice test question on the Kent State shootings, with

correct answer indicated

o One constructed-response question requiring text-based evidence in the

response

o One model answer to the constructed-response question.

Unit Four

Topics

• Formative Assessments

• Technology and Assessments

Reading Assignments

• Greenstein, L. (2010). Chapter 3: Formative assessment prior to instruction. In What

teachers really need to know about formative assessment. EBSCO Publishing: eBook

Collection EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/26/2017 10:28 PM via BELHAVEN

UNIVERSITY

• Romans 13:8-10; I Corinthians 13:1-13; John 16; Matthew 5; Ecclesiastes 9:9-10;

Ephesians 4:1-4; Galatians 5:19-

View Lecture – Unit 4

TAKE QUIZ 4

Discussion Question: (10 points) Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Student revision and re-testing of non-mastered concepts has become expected practice,

but it is still a controversial topic. Teachers wonder how they can find the time to do it

all, feel it encourages students to avoid studying in the first place, and it places all

responsibility for learning on the teach. How do you address these complaints?

Writing Assignment: Formative Assessments (60 points) Due by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Using the resources indicated for the Kent State shooting, create a series of formative

assessments that are designed to help students progress towards mastery of your final

assessment. Your assessments need to target the development of critical thinking skills,

content comprehension, and a text structure (use resource “Types of Text Structures in

Informational Text” as a reference).

• Requirements:

o Minimum of three formative assessments

▪ One targeting critical thinking skills

▪ One targeting reading comprehension

▪ One targeting text structure

o These assessments are NOT to be quizzes, KWL charts, or exit tickets.

Unit Five

Topics

• What is an Item Analysis?

• How do you conduct an Item Analysis?

• What is the Code of Ethical Responsibilities in Assessment?

Reading Assignments

• Clump, M., & Sandoval, M. (2010). Did the assignment do what you wanted?

Examining the correlations between learning processes and class assessments. Journal of

Instructional Psychology, 37(4).

• Schmeiser, C. et al. (2017). Code of professional responsibilities in educational

measurement.

(Available in Canvas reading assignments)

View Lecture – Unit 5

TAKE QUIZ 5

Discussion Question: NONE

Writing Assignment: Item Analysis (50 points) Due by Saturday 11:59 p.m.
• Ten students have taken an objective assessment. The quiz contained 10 questions. In the

attached table, the students’ scores have been listed from high to low (Joe, Dave, Sujie,

Darrell, and Eliza are in the upper half). There are five students in the upper half and five

students in the lower half. The number “1” indicates a correct answer on the question; a

“0” indicates an incorrect answer.

o Requirements:

o Complete the item analysis table.

o Answer the questions on the worksheet.

o Upload your completed worksheet to Canvas.

Reminder:

• Final Projects 1 and 2 are due in Unit 7.

Unit Six

Topics – Part A

• Analyzing Score Reports

• Progress Monitoring and the RtI Process

• Standards-based Grading

• RtI Overview

• Learning Progressions

• TST Process

Reading Assignments

• Mississippi Department of Education. (2016). Parent and family guide to understanding

response to intervention. (Available in Canvas reading assignments)

• Mississippi Department of Education. (2016). A family guide to the MAP score reports.

(Available in Canvas reading assignments)

• Popham, W. J. (2011). Chapter 2: Learning progressions: Blueprints for the formative

assessment process. In Transformative assessment in action: An inside look at applying

the process. EBSCO Publishing: eBook Collection EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/26/20

10:28 PM via BELHAVEN UNIVERSITY and available in Canvas.

View Lecture – Unit 6.

TAKE QUIZ 6

Discussion Question (10 points): Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Discuss the intervention (RtI, Tier I, II, III) process in your school. How well is it

working? Who is responsible for delivering instruction at the different tier levels? What

about the paperwork involved?

Writing Assignment: Submit by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Analyze Score Report (50 points)

o Analyze the attached student score report. Develop a learning progression for one

skill that is part of an identified area of weakness (either the math or the ELA

report can be used; you do not need to address both areas). Be sure to address all

five choice-points (see Popham article) for building a learning progression.

Topics – Part B

• Writing and using rubrics

• Examining student work

View Lecture – Unit 7

TAKE QUIZ 7

Discussion Question: (10 points) Post your initial response to the discussion forum by

Wednesday 11:59 p.m. and respond to the discussion of others by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• When are holistic rubrics a better choice than analytic rubrics? When are analytic rubrics

a better choice? Discuss your experiences using both in your classes. Include a reflection

of how you could improve your implementation of rubrics.

Writing Assignment: (50 points) Due by Saturday 11:59 p.m.

• Rubric Creation: Create an analytic rubric suitable for use in evaluating an essay

assessment. Your rubric must follow the guidelines set forth for your final project and

may be the rubric you will use with your final project. Be sure to include your identified

standards and instructions to students. Refer to the article “Rubrics for Assessment” and

the scoring rubric in the Appendix for additional information.

Unit Seven

Topics

• Grading practices to avoid

• Gamification of teaching and assessing

• Trends in assessment

• Key features of the education revolution

• Changes needed in assessment

• How technology can help

Reading Assignments

• Hill, P., & Barber, M. (2014). Preparing for a renaissance in assessment. Pearson:

#PearsonResearch. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-

com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-

ideas/PreparingforaRenaissanceinAssessment

• Scriptures: Review all Scriptures

View Lecture – Unit 8

TAKE QUIZ 8

Final Projects: Submit by Saturday 11:59 p.m. Checklist

• Projects 1 and 2: Kent State Shooting Assessment and Narrative (400

points)

o You are to create an original assessment based on the information presented in

this course about the Kent State shooting of May 14, 1970. Your assessment will

consist of multiple-choice questions, constructed-response questions, and essay

with rubric. Complete instructions are located in the Appendix. Grading is via

checklist and rubric.

▪ Project 1 – Assessment: 200 points

▪ Project 2 – Reflection on Assessment: 200 points

https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/PreparingforaRenaissanceinAssessment

APPENDIX A

Rubric for Weekly Discussion Forum Participation

Points

(4 points for initial post; 2 points for each response)
NOTE: All initial posts are due by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. each week. All responses to

colleagues are due by Saturday, 11:59 p.m. each week.

Fully Met (2 pts.) Partially Met (1 pt.) Not Met (0 pts.)

INITIAL

RESPONSE TO

PROMPT: Reveals

accurate

understanding of key

concepts/ideas

Post’s ideas are

consistent with the

readings and lectures

and accurately

represent key

concepts and ideas.

Post’s ideas are

related to the readings

and lectures and

accurately represent

key concepts and

ideas, but some

elements of the

prompt are weak or

lacking in substance.

Post’s ideas are

inconsistent with the

readings and/or

lectures and do not

accurately address

key concepts and

ideas.

INITIAL

RESPONSE TO

PROMPT: Integrates

specifics from

readings and/or

experiences

Post interweaves

specific evidence

from readings AND

personal teaching

experiences to

support argument.

Post interweaves

specific evidence

from readings OR

personal teaching

experiences to

support argument.

Post consists of

opinions unsupported

by evidence from

readings or personal

teaching experiences.

RESPONSE TO

CLASSMATE #1

Response offers a

substantive

discussion or

elaboration on the

key

elements in the

original post.

Response offers a

discussion of the key

elements in the

original post.

Response lacks

substance; it is

primarily an

agreement with or

acknowledgement of

the original post.

RESPONSE TO

CLASSMATE #2

Response offers a

substantive

discussion or

elaboration on the

key elements in the

original post.

Response offers a

discussion of the key

elements in the

original post.

Response lacks

substance; it is

primarily an

agreement with or

acknowledgement of

the original post.

RESPONSE TO

CLASSMATE #3

Response offers a

substantive

discussion or

elaboration on the

key elements in the

original post.

Response offers a

discussion of the key

elements in the

original post.

Response lacks

substance; it is

primarily an

agreement with or

acknowledgement of

the original post.

NOTE 1: Presence of grammatical or mechanical errors in a post limits a grade to

“Partially Met” if errors are few or minimal or “Not Met” if multiple errors are

present.

NOTE 2: One “Response to Classmate” can be a continuation of a discussion with the

same classmate. The continued discussion must be substantive and continue to add to

the conversation.

APPENDIX B

Writing Assignment Scoring Guide

Writing Assignment Scoring Guide formatted for Canvas

Writing Objectives template

Writing Objectives scoring guide

Calculating Discrimination and Difficulty Indexes Checklist

Rubric Creation Rubric

Projects 1 and 2: Kent State Shooting Assessment Instructions

Project 1: Kent State Shooting Assessment Checklist

Project 2: Kent State Shooting Narrative Rubric

Week 1 – Writing Assignment Scoring Guide

A. Page 1 (2 points – 1 point for each bullet)

• Full title of the article, your name, department and university, course number and name,

professor’s name, and due date of assignment

• Properly formatted page number

• Hard copy of article attached where indicated in Canvas (0 points without article or if

article was published more than 6 years ago)

B. Pages 2-4 (Headings 1 – 6 below are all Level One in your paper)

1. The Problem (5 points – 1 point for each bullet)

• Is the problem clearly stated?

• Is the problem practically important?

• What is the purpose of the study?

• What is the hypothesis?

• Are the key terms defined?

2. Review of Literature (5 points – 1 point for each bullet)

• Are the cited sources pertinent to the study?

• Is the review too broad or too narrow?

• Are the references recent?

• Are the references thorough enough for the topic of the paper?

• What possible evidence of bias exists?

3. Design and procedures (5 points – 1 point for each bullet)

• What research design was used (survey, observation, experiment)?

• Was it a pilot, replica study, or an original study?

• What measurement tools were used? What statistical formulas were employed?

• How were the procedures structured?

• What are the variables? How was sampling conducted?

4. Data Analysis and presentation (8 points – 2 points for each bullet)

• How were data analyzed?

• Were data qualitative or quantitative?

• Did findings support the hypothesis and purpose?

• Were weaknesses and problems discussed?

5. Conclusions and Implications (5 points – 1 point for each bullet)

• Are the conclusions of the study related to the original purpose?

• Address the credibility of the authors or principal investigators.

• Were the implications discussed?

• Whom will the results and conclusions affect?

• What recommendations were made at the conclusion?

6. Overall Assessment (5 points – holistic assessment)

• What is your overall assessment of the study’s value and significance?

• What did you learn?

C. Page 5 Reference Article citation in APA 7th Ed. Format (0 errors: 4 pts, 1+ errors: 0

pts)

D. Overall APA 7th Edition Format (4-5 errors: 2 pts, 1-3 errors: 3 pts, 0 errors: 5pts)

Writing Objectives Template

Standard: (subject area, grade level)

Key:

Audience – (color)

Behavior – (color)

Condition – (color)

Degree – (color)

Cognitive Domain

Standard (copied from MDE Standards document)

Write two objectives that address separate cognitive aspects of your chosen standard.

Psychomotor Domain

Standard (copied from MDE Standards document)

Write two objectives that address separate psychomotor aspects of your chosen standard.

Affective Domain

Standard (copied from MDE Standards document)

Write two objectives that address separate cognitive aspect of your chosen standard.

NOTE: The standards selected for each of the three domains do not need to be the same

standards but must be from a common subject area and grade level.

—————————————————————————————————————-

Descriptions of elements of your objectives

Audience

Specifies the learner(s) for whom the objective is intended

Behavior

Describes the capability expected of the learner following instruction

• stated as a learner performance

• stated as observable behavior

• describes a real-world skill (versus mere test performance)

Conditions (materials and/or environment)

Describes the conditions under which the performance is to be demonstrated

• equipment, tools, aids, or references the learner may or may not use

• special environment conditions in which the learner is to perform

Degree (criterion)

States, where applicable, the standard for acceptable performance

• time limit

• range of accuracy

• proportion of correct responses required

• qualitative standards

Writing Objectives Scoring Guide
(50 pts)

(NOTE: improperly formatted paper yields a 3-point deduction)

Appropriately

Stated
Partly Stated Missing

Cognitive Domain Objective 1

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt.

0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Cognitive Domain Objective 2

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Psychomotor Domain Objective 1

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Psychomotor Domain Objective 2

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Affective Domain Objective 1

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Affective Domain Objective 2

Audience 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Behavior 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Conditions 2 pt. 1 pt. 0 pts.

Degree 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

Color Coding 1 pt. 0.5 pt. 0 pts.

InTASC Standard 7: Planning Instruction

The teacher plans and manages instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and

curriculum goals.

Calculating Discrimination and Difficulty Indexes Checklist

(50 pts)

Answered correctly Partial Answer

Answered

correctly

Answered

Incorrectly

# correct upper

group

all numbers correct

5 pts.

1incorrect number

3 pts.

2 incorrect

numbers

1 pt.

3 or more incorrect

numbers

0 pts.

# correct lower

group

all numbers correct

5 pts.

1incorrect number

3 pts.

2 incorrect numbers

1 pt.

3 or more incorrect

numbers

0 pts.

Difficulty

index

0 incorrect

calculations

8 pts.

1 incorrect

calculation

5 pts.

2 incorrect

calculations

2 pts.

3 or more incorrect

calculations

0 pts.

Discrimination

index

0 incorrect

calculations

8 pts.

1 incorrect

calculation

5 pts.

2 incorrect

calculations

2 pts.

3 or more incorrect

calculations

0 pts.

Questions 1 – 3

3 questions

answered correctly

9 pts.

2 questions

answered correctly

6 pts.

1 question answered

correctly

3 pts.

0 questions

answered correctly

0 pts.

Question 4

question selection or

no selection

adequately

supported by factual

evidence

5 pts.

factual evidence

missing, weak, or

not connected to

concept of

discrimination

0 pts.

Question 5

overall calculations

are correct;

explanation for

decision supported

by factual evidence

5 pts.

overall calculations

are incorrect and/or

explanation for

decision NOT

supported by factual

evidence

0 pts.

Question 6

overall calculations

are correct;

explanation for

decision supported

by factual evidence

5 pts.

overall calculations

are incorrect and/or

explanation for

decision NOT

supported by factual

evidence

0 pts.

InTASC 6

Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal

CAEP R1.3

Data

Literacy

Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal

Rubric Creation Rubric

Meets Requirements Approaching Below

Selection

and Clarity

of Criteria

(rows)

All criteria are clear,

distinct, and derived from

appropriate standards for

product/task and subject

area

(5 points)

Criteria being assessed can

be identified, but not all are

clearly differentiated or

derived from appropriate

standards for product/task

and subject

area

(3 points)

Criteria being assessed are

unclear, have significant

overlap, or are not derived

from appropriate

standards

for product/task and subject

area

(1 point)

Distinction

between

Levels

(columns)

Each level is distinct and

progresses in a clear and

logical order

(5 points)

Some distinction between

levels is clear, but may be

too narrow or too big of a

jump

(3 points)

Little or no distinction can

be made between levels of

achievement

(1 point)

Quality of

Writing

Writing is understandable to

all users

of rubric, including

students; it has clear,

specific language that helps

different users reliably

agree on a score

(5 points)

Writing is mostly

understandable to all users

of rubric, including

students; some language

may cause confusion among

different users

(3 points)

Writing is not

understandable to all users

of rubric, including

students; it has vague and

unclear language which

makes it difficult for

different users to agree on a

score

(1 point)

Distribution

of Score

Points

Points for each level of

achievement are indicated

for each criteria (see this

rubric for an example of

showing points in each

cell).

Rubric weighted on content,

not mechanics or

appearance (no more than

20%

of points)

(5 points)

Points for each level of

achievement are indicated

for most criteria (no more

than 2 cells are missing

points).

Rubric weighted on content,

not mechanics or

appearance (21 – 40% of

points)

(3 points)

Points for each level of

achievement are not

consistently indicated for

each criteria (see Kent State

rubric for an example of

showing points in each

cell).

Rubric weighted on

mechanics or appearance,

not content (more than 40%

of points)

(1 point)

Total of

Points for

the Essay

Rubric points total 100

(5 points)

Rubric points total between

90 – 110 points but not 100

points

(3 points)

Rubric points do not total

between 90 – 110 points

(1 point)

Projects 1 and 2: Kent State Shooting Assessment

400 Total Points

***DUE UNIT 7***

Project 1: Kent State Shooting Assessment (200 points)
Your assignment is to carefully study the indicated resources and create two original assessments

designed to evaluate student comprehension and understanding of the issues presented in these

materials and how they relate to today’s issues.

Required Source Documents

• Song: Ohio by Crosby, Stills, Nash, & Young (1970).

• Newsweek Archived Article http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-

1970-coverage-kent-state-328108

• http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting

• https://www.ohiohistory.org/tag/kent-state-shooting/

Assessment 1: Traditional Test

Using the materials above, create an assessment suitable for use as an end-of-unit test.

Your assessment will consist of a mixture of multiple-choice and constructed-response

items. Include point distribution (i.e., how many points each item is worth) for each

section. This test is to be completely your original work – you are not permitted to find

and adapt from other sources any test questions to use in your project. Sources to help

you with this assignment include the articles “Test Taxonomy” and “Assembling the

Test” found in Canvas, plus any other review articles on how to construct good tests you

might consult.

Multiple-Choice section:

• Number of items: 10

• Bloom’s Taxonomy: Each of the 6 levels discussed in the article “Test

Taxonomy” must be assessed by at least one item.

• No more than two Lower-Order questions (Knowledge and/or Comprehension)

can be utilized.

• Answer key provided

▪ Indicate the correct answer

▪ Identify the specific part of the specific standard each item is addressing

▪ Label each item as to type

• LR – lower recall or LU – lower understanding (no more than two)

• HAP – higher application; HAN – higher analysis; HE – higher

evaluate; HC – higher create (at least one of each)

http://www.newsweek.com/my-god-theyre-killing-us-our-1970-coverage-kent-state-328108

http://www.history.com/topics/kent-state-shooting

https://www.ohiohistory.org/tag/kent-state-shooting/

Constructed-Response section:

• Number of item: 5

• Targeted DOK levels: 2 and 3

• Each question must require students taking the test to consult with and

reference/cite information from two sources in order to be successful.

o Answer key provided

▪ Indicate a suggested correct answer

▪ Identify the specific part of the specific standard each question is

addressing

▪ Label each question as to type

• HAP – higher application; HAN – higher analysis; HE – higher

evaluate; HC – higher create (at least one of each)

Assessment 2: Essay Test

Using the materials above, create an assessment suitable for use as an end-of-unit test.

Your assessment will consist of one comprehensive prompt concerning a specific aspect,

theme or connection with the Kent State shooting. You are also required to create an

analytic scoring rubric for your essay. The test and rubric are to be completely your

original work: you are not permitted to find and adapt assessment items from other

sources, including rubric-generating websites and/or any published essay prompts or

rubrics to use in your project. One good website on creating strong rubrics is

http://www.assessmentforlearning.edu.au/professional_learning/success_criteria_and_rub

rics/success_design_rubrics.html

Essay section

• Number of prompts: 1

• Targeted DOK level: 3 and/or 4

• Students taking the test must be required to consult and reference all 4 sources in

order to achieve a proficient or advanced rating on the rubric.

• To help assess the connections students make between events of 1970 and today,

you are allowed to add 2 credible sources to your assessment.

• Provide scoring rubric. Be sure the point values for each criterion are included in

the rubric (see the rubrics in this course for an example). Be sure that 80% of the

points in your rubric address content comprehension and analysis as directed by

your identified standards and not surface issues such as mechanics, grammar,

typing, etc.

http://www.assessmentforlearning.edu.au/professional_learning/success_criteria_and_rubrics/success_design_rubrics.html

Project 1: Kent State Shooting Assessment Checklist
200 Points

Meets Requirements Approaching Below

Multiple-Choice Items Ten test items

(8 pts)

Fewer than ten test items

(4 pts)

Multiple-Choice Items All six of the cognitive domains are
correctly represented (8 pts)

Five of the cognitive domains are
correctly represented (6 pts)

Four or fewer of the cognitive domains are
correctly represented (4 pts)

Multiple-Choice Items All test items correctly labeled for type of

understanding (8 pts)

Eight or Nine test items correctly labeled

for type of understanding (6 pts)

Fewer than seven test items correctly labeled

for type of understanding (2 pts)

Multiple-Choice Items No more than two lower-order items (can
be fewer) (8 pts)

Three or more lower-order items.
(4 pts)

Multiple-Choice

Items

Complete answer key with standards and

point values

indicated (8 pts)

Answer key with standards and point

values indicated for eight or nine items (6
pts)

Incomplete answer key OR

with standards

OR point

values indicated (4 pts)

Constructed-

Response

Items
Five test items

(8 pts)

Fewer than five test items

(4 pts)

Constructed-Response

Items
All items DOK 2 or higher
(8 pts)

Four items DOK 2 or higher
(6 pts)

Three or fewer items DOK 2 or
(4 pts) higher

Constructed-Response

Items
More than one question format utilized

(8 pts)

One question format utilized

(4 pts)

Constructed-Response

Items
Each item requires synthesis of information

from 2 or more sources (8 pts)

Four of the five items require synthesis of

information from 2 or more sources (6 pts)

Three or fewer items require synthesis of

information from 2 or more sources (4 pts)

Constructed-Response

Items

Complete answer key with expected student
response, standards and point values

indicated (8 pts)

Four of the five with expected student
response, standards AND/OR point

values indicated (6 pts)

Three or more items NOT with expected
student response OR standards OR point

values indicated (4 pts)

Essay Item – Question

Construction

One prompt

Aligned with all components of the
identified standards (9 pts)

One prompt

Aligned with main ideas in identified
standards (4.5 pts)

Essay Item – Question

Construction

Clear directions for what is expected in the

essay and how to write the essay are
provided to students

(10 pts)

Directions for how to write the essay are

NOT provided to students OR directions are
unclear

(5 pts)

Essay Item – Question

Construction

Students are required to incorporate

evidence from all sources into their

response (10 pts)

Students are NOT required to incorporate

evidence from all sources into their response

(5 pts)

Essay Item – Analytic

Rubric Construction

Each criteria is distinct, clearly delineated

and fully appropriate for the

assignment(s)/course (9 pts)

Criteria being assessed are clear,

appropriate and distinct (6.75 pts)

Criteria being assessed can be identified, but

are not clearly differentiated or are

inappropriate (4.5 pts)

Essay Item – Analytic

Rubric Construction

Each level is distinct and progresses in a

clear and logical order

(10 pts)

Distinction between levels is apparent

(7.5 pts)

Some distinction between levels is made, but

is not totally clear how well

(5 pts)

Essay Item – Analytic

Rubric Construction

Rubric weighted on content, not mechanics

or appearance (no more than 20% of pts)

(10 pts)

Rubric weighted on content, not

mechanics or appearance (21-30% of

points) (7.5 pts)

Rubric weighted more on mechanics or

appearance (31-50% of points) than content

(5 pts)

Format
Clear student directions for each section of
test (8 pts)

Minimal or unclear student directions
provided (4 pts)

Format
Point values for each section or question

clearly indicated (8 pts)

Some information about how the test will be

graded/scored is given (4 pts)

Format
All test layout guidelines followed correctly
(8 pts)

Test layout guidelines generally followed but
test is hard to read or follow (4 pts)

Format
Appropriate application of white space (8

pts)

White space use evident but some crowding

is present (4 pts)

Mechanics

The presentation

demonstrates exceptional

use of standard

English conventions

(mechanics, usage, grammar and syntax).

NO ERRORS.

(30 pts)

The presentation demonstrates consistent
use of standard English conventions

(mechanics, usage, grammar and syntax).

(1-2 MINOR errors).

(22.5 points)

The presentation

demonstrates inconsistent

use of standard English conventions

(mechanics, usage, grammar and syntax). (3-

5 errors).

(15 points)

Project 2: Narrative on the test (200 points) REFER TO THE RUBRIC TO

MAKE SURE YOU DO NOT OMIT ANY REQUIRED ELEMENTS

Analysis of Multiple-Choice and Constructed-Response Questions

• Identify the targeted grade level of your assessment.

• Identify appropriate standards and/or subsections of standards for EACH item. In

other words, what standard is each test question assessing? You must include 2 or

more standards or subsections of standards within your test.

o Example: RL 10.4 Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they

are used in the text.

o Include the appropriate DOK level for each question.

o Justify your assignment of the DOK level for each question.

• Identify the number of points for each question/section and justify the

distribution of points.

• Provide a bulleted list of expected student response for CR questions

• Explain how your collection of MC and CR items address ALL aspects of the

identified

standards.

Analysis of Essay Test and Scoring Rubric

• Identify the targeted grade level of your assessment (does not need to be the same

as for your MC/CR test).

• Identify the appropriate standards your essay is to assess.

• Provide a bulleted list of key elements you expect a proficient response to

address. Identify additional elements you expect an advanced response to

address.

• Defend your rubric descriptors for each criterion you selected. Provide evidence

that your scoring indicators at each level of achievement clearly delineated so that

there is no question about what type of response earns a score of 4, 3, 2, or 1.

Discussion

• Describe how your expected student responses for CR and Essay questions

address all elements of identified standards

• Describe how your expected student responses for CR and Essay questions

represent rigorous grade-level understandings of concepts

• Analyze the possible ways students can answer questions correctly on your

assessment. Can a student earn a passing grade on your test without having

demonstrated the targeted DOK level of the standards being assessed? Justify the

distribution of rigor among your questions.

Project 2: Narrative on the test

MC and CR Assessment Items

Targeted grade level: _______

Standard(s) Addressed by this Assessment (can be more than one):

•

Multiple choice question analysis (table will expand as you type your responses):

Question Points

Portion of standard

addressed

(Be specific)

DOK

Level
Justification of DOK level

Constructed Response question analysis (table will expand as you type your responses):

Question Points

Portion of standard

addressed

(Be specific)

DOK

Level
Justification of DOK level

Expected response:

Explain how your collection of MC and CR items address ALL aspects of the identified

standards.

(Begin typing here)

Essay Analysis

Targeted grade level: _______

Standard(s) Addressed by this Assessment (can be more than one):

•

Key Elements expected in a Proficient response (add additional lines as needed):

•

Additional Elements expected for an Advanced response (add additional lines as needed):

•

Rubric Criterion Defense:

(Begin typing here)

Rubric Scoring Indicators Defense:

(Begin typing here)

Discussion

Point 1:

Standards

(Begin typing here)

Point 2: Grade-level understandings

(Begin typing here)

Point 3: Analysis of possible student scoring on test

(Begin typing here)

Project 2: Kent State Shooting Narrative Rubric
(200 points)

Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal

Identification and

Verification of

Standards

The teacher can construct

assessments appropriate

to the learning outcomes

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Content Knowledge)

• Each MC and CR

question is discussed

regarding the type of

understanding and the

DOK levels

• Justification of identified

DOK levels is

comprehensive, clear and

convincing

(30 points)

• MC and CR question groups

are discussed regarding the

type of understanding and

the DOK levels

• Justification of identified

DOK levels is clear and

convincing with some

evidence of vagueness

(25.5 points)

• A general discussion

regarding the type of

understanding and the

DOK levels for the MC

and CR questions is

presented

• Justification of identified

DOK levels is weak and/or

generic

(21 points)

• A general discussion

regarding the type of

understanding and the

DOK levels for the MC

OR CR questions is

presented

• Justification of identified

DOK levels is incorrect

or missing

(16.5 points)

Analysis of Test Items

The teacher can construct

assessments appropriate

to the learning outcomes

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Content Knowledge)

• Standards (2 or more) for

each question are listed

and justified

• Collection of test items

address all components of

identified standards

• Items target expected

grade-level

understandings of

concepts

(30 points)

• Standards (2 or more) for

each question are listed

• Collection of test items

address majority of

components of identified

standards

• Questions target expected

grade-level understandings

of concepts

(25.5 points)

• One standard for each

question is listed

• Collection of test items

address some components

of identified standards

• Questions DO NOT target

expected grade-level

understandings of concepts

(21 points)

• Standards for one or more

questions are missing

• One or more test items do

not address any identified

standards

• Questions DO NOT

address expected grade-

level understandings of

concepts

(16.5 points)

Expected Student

Response

The teacher knows how

to construct assessments

appropriate to the

learning outcomes being

evaluated.

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Measure Students’

progress)

• Candidate provides an

accurate bulleted list of

expected student response

for CR questions and a

bulleted list of key points

expected in essay for

proficient and advanced

response

(30 points)

• Candidate provides an

accurate bulleted list of

expected student response for

CR questions and a bulleted

list of key points expected in

essay for a proficient response

(25.5 points)

• Candidate provides an

answer key for CR questions

and a bulleted list of key

points expected in essay but

some points miss the

proficiency level

(21 points)

• Candidate provides an

incomplete answer key for

CR questions and an

incomplete or inaccurate

bulleted list of key points

expected in essay

(16.5 points)

Point Distribution and

Scoring – Part 1

The teacher understands

assessment issues of

scoring.

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Content Knowledge)

• Bulleted list of expected

student response for CR

questions address all

major elements of

identified standards

• Expected student

responses for CR

questions represent grade-

level understandings of

concepts

(15 points)

• Bulleted list of expected

student response for CR

questions address identified

standards

• Expected

student responses

for CR

questions represent

grade-level understandings

of concepts

(12.75 points)

• CR questions answered

• Some student responses for

CR questions partially

align with grade-level

expectations

(10.5 points)

• Some questions answered

• Bulleted list lacks key

points

• Expected student

responses do not align

with standards

• Expected student

responses for CR

questions do not match

grade-level expectations

(8.25 points)

Point Distribution and

Scoring – Part 2

The teacher understands

assessment issues of

scoring.

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Content Knowledge)

• Bulleted list of key points

expected in essay for

proficient and advanced

response address all

major elements of

identified standards

• Expected student

responses for Essay

questions represent

rigorous grade-level

understandings of

concepts

• (15 points)

• Bulleted list of key points

expected in essay for

proficient response address

identified standards

• Expected student responses

for Essay questions

represent grade-level

understandings of concepts

• (12.75 points)

• Bulleted list of key points

expected in essay but some

points miss the proficiency

level OR do not align with

grade-level expectations

• (10.5 points)

• Expected student

responses do not align

with standards OR do not

match grade-level

expectations

• (8.25 points)

Justification of Rigor

The teacher appropriately

uses a variety of

assessment techniques to

evaluate student

progress.

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Rigorous Standards)

• Justification of rigor of

test construction –

discussion of all ways a

student can achieve a

passing score on your test

and still reach the level of

rigor and proficiency

indicated in the standards

(30 points)

• Justification of rigor of test

construction – discussion of

how a student can achieve a

passing score on your test

and still reach the level of

rigor and proficiency

indicated in the standards

(25.5 points)

• Justification of rigor of test

construction – a student

can achieve a passing score

on your test but NOT reach

the level of rigor and

proficiency indicated in the

standards

(21 points)

• Justification of rigor of

test construction – weak

justification of the rigor

of the test and potential

student responses

(16.5 points)

Defense of Scoring

The teacher understands

assessment issues of

scoring.

(InTASC 6; CAEP 1.3

Rigorous Standards)

• Defense of rubric levels

for essay test clearly

explains expectations for

scores of 4,3,2,1 and

includes requirement of

all sources for

advanced/proficient

student score

(30 points)

• Defense of rubric levels for

essay test generally

describes expectations for

scores of 4,3,2,1 and

includes requirement of

three sources proficient/

Basic student score

(25.5 points)

• Defense of rubric levels

for essay test does NOT

describe expectations for

scores of 4, 3, 2, 1 OR only

two sources required for

student response

(21 points)

• No defense of rubric

levels for essay test OR

only zero or one source

required for student

response

(16.5 points)

APA-Compliant

Formatting

Consistently follows APA

format. There is a properly

formatted and accurate

reference page (NO errors)

(10 points)

Consistently follows APA

format. There is a properly

formatted and accurate

reference page (1-2 MINOR

errors) (8.5 points)

Limited (3-5) errors in APA

format including title page,

running heads, citations,

quotations or references (7

points)

More than 5 APA errors in

format including title page,

running heads, citations,

quotations or references

(5.5 points)

Mechanics

The presentation

demonstrates exceptional

use of standard English

conventions (mechanics,

usage, grammar and

syntax). NO ERRORS

(10 points)

The presentation demonstrates

consistent use of standard

English conventions

(mechanics, usage, grammar

and syntax). (1-2 MINOR

errors). (8.5 points)

The presentation

demonstrates inconsistent

use of standard English

conventions (mechanics,

usage,

grammar and syntax).

(3-5 errors). (7 points)

The presentation does NOT

demonstrate use of standard

English conventions

(mechanics, usage,

grammar and syntax).

(More than 5 errors). (5.5

points)

APPENDIX C

InTASC Standards

Standard 1 – Learner Development
The teacher understands how children learn and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and

across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and

challenging learning experiences

Standard 2 – Learning Differences
The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that

allow each learner to reach his/her full potential.

Standard 3 – Learning Environments
The teacher works with learners to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, encouraging positive social

interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Standard 4 – Content Knowledge

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning
experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners.

Standard 5 – Innovative Applications of Content

The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical/creative thinking and
collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.

Standard 6 – Assessment

The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to document learner progress, and

to guide the teacher’s ongoing planning and instruction.

Standard 7 – Planning for Instruction

The teacher draws upon knowledge of content areas, cross-disciplinary skills, learners, the community, and pedagogy to plan instruction that

supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals. (The teacher is able to plan instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter,
students, the community, and curriculum goals.)

Standard 8 – Instructional Strategies

The teacher understands and uses a formal and informal instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of

content areas and their connections, and to build skills to access and appropriately apply information.

Standard 9 – Reflection and Continuous Growth

The teacher is a reflective practitioner who uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices

and actions on others (students, families, and other professionals in the learning community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each
learner.

Standard 10 – Collaboration

The teacher collaborates with students, families, colleagues, other professionals, and community members to share responsibility for student

growth and development, learning, and well-being.

Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal

The student’s performance is

exemplary and consistently
exceeds expectations.

Indications of a high level of

critical and reflective thinking,
with a depth of understanding a

core knowledge base, as well as

demonstrates academic and
professional skills.

The student’s performance

consistently meets expectations.
The student effectively

demonstrations the requirements

with expected professional
performance indicating an

understanding of a core

knowledge base with the
application of critical thinking,

academic, and professional

skills.

The student’s performance

sometimes meets expectations
but is not doing so consistently.

Student demonstrates little depth

of knowledge base
understanding and little evidence

of critical and/or reflective

thinking.

The student’s performance

demonstrates mediocre work,
very little effort or

demonstration of responses to

requirements. The student
demonstrates little to no

understanding of a core

knowledge base with little to no
critical/reflective thinking,

academic or professional skills.

CAEP: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions

Standard 1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge

The provider ensures that candidates develop an understanding of the critical concepts and

principles of their discipline and facilitates candidates’ reflection of their personal biases to

increase their understanding and practice of equity, diversity, and inclusion. The provider is

intentional in the development of their curriculum and clinical experiences for candidates to

demonstrate their ability to effectively work

with diverse P-12 students and their

families.

R1.1 The Learner and Learning

The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of the learner and

learning at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided should demonstrate that

candidates are able to apply critical concepts and principles of learner development

(InTASC Standard 1), learning differences (InTASC Standard 2), and creating safe

and supportive learning environments (InTASC Standard 3) in order to work effectively

with diverse P-12 students and their families.

R1.2 Content The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of

content at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided demonstrates candidates

know central concepts of their content area (InTASC Standard 4) and are able to apply

the content in developing equitable and inclusive learning experiences (InTASC

Standard 5) for diverse P-12

students.

R1.3 Instructional Practice The provider ensures that candidates are able to apply their

knowledge of InTASC standards relating to instructional practice at the appropriate

progression levels. Evidence demonstrates how candidates are able to assess (InTASC

Standard 6), plan for instruction (InTASC Standard 7), and utilize a variety of

instructional strategies (InTASC Standard 8) to provide equitable and inclusive learning

experiences for diverse P-12 students. Providers ensure candidates model and apply

national or state approved technology standards to engage and improve learning for all

students.

R1.4 Professional Responsibility The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their

knowledge of professional responsibility at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence

provided should demonstrate candidates engage in professional learning, act ethically

(InTASC Standard 9), take responsibility for student learning, and collaborate with

others (InTASC Standard 10) to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their

families.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Kent’s ”

Get high-quality paper

Guarantee! All work is written by expert writers!

Still stressed from student homework?

Get quality assistance from academic writers!

Order now