PowerPoint Assignment | Homework Help Websites
Directions: Make sure you incorporate differentiated instruction techniques , MS standards, etc. and the instructional approaches that vary as it is relates to individuals and diverse students. PowerPoint slides should be at least 10 with scholarly meaning and citations.
Technology PowerPoint Presentation: The PowerPoint presentation shall highlight your practicum experience, such as:
Working with individual students
Working with small groups of students
Conducting and analyzing assessments
Creating lessons/materials of students
Attending professional meeting
Lunch and recess duties
ANYTHING teachers do in their everyday activities!
Writing Rubric
Writing Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAppropriate Details
20.0 pts
Outstanding
Judicious choice of details maximizes interest and understanding
15.0 pts
Very Good
All relevant details presented, but details not critical to understanding omitted
10.0 pts
Good
Enough critical details presented for understanding, unnecessary details generally omitted
5.0 pts
Satisfactory
Most important details included but may include too much or too little detail for easy understanding
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Some critical details missing, unnecessary details may be present
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStatement of Context, Relevance in Subject Area
12.0 pts
Outstanding
Place of study in field clearly described, illuminating links to other studies or topics made
9.0 pts
Very Good
Place of study in field clearly described, some reference to relationship to other studies or topics
6.0 pts
Good
General reference of study in field described
3.0 pts
Satisfactory
Attempt made to place in context, possibly not quite appropriately
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
No attempt made to describe context of study
12.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriter’s Evaluation of the Study
10.0 pts
Outstanding
Clearly articulated, well-supported statements of value and/or shortcomings of study
7.0 pts
Very Good
Evaluation includes positive value of study as well as clearly supported explanation of shortcomings
4.0 pts
Good
Good attempt at evaluation with some support of conclusions; possibly more negative than positive comments
2.0 pts
Satisfactory
Some attempt at evaluation, comments valid but not necessarily well supported
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
No attempt to evaluate study or evaluative statements unsupported or inappropriate
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall Organization
14.0 pts
Outstanding
Overall purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of study clearly stated; seemingly effortless and seamless logic flow
11.0 pts
Very Good
Overall purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of study clearly stated; logical flow always easy to follow
8.0 pts
Good
Purpose, methods, results and conclusions clearly stated; most of presentation flows logically
4.0 pts
Satisfactory
Purpose, methods, results, and conclusions stated; possibly some awkwardness in logical flow
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Major sections missing or lack of logical flow
14.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity of Explanations
18.0 pts
Outstanding
Sophisticated use of language maximizes interest, enjoyment and comprehension; explanations very clear, factually correct
14.0 pts
Very Good
All explanations are clear and easy to understand, factually correct
10.0 pts
Good
Most explanations clear and easy to understand, mostly factually correct
6.0 pts
Satisfactory
Overall meeting is understandable; possibly some areas of slight confusion or minor factual errors
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Serious difficulty explaining ideas, major factual errors; lack of comprehensibility
18.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of Terminology
10.0 pts
Outstanding
Correct use of all terminology, attention to nuances of meaning, judicious use of clearly defined jargon
7.0 pts
Very Good
All technical terms used correctly and defined clearly, including terms with different common meanings; overuse of jargon avoided
4.0 pts
Good
Few errors in use of terminology; definitions provided for technical terms, overuse of jargon avoided
2.0 pts
Satisfactory
Most terms used correctly, possibly some incorrect usage or use of unnecessary or undefined jargon
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Jargon terms used incorrectly, without definition; attempting to sound “scientific” without understanding meaning of terms
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Style
16.0 pts
Outstanding
Sophisticated, elegant style, complex yet lucid sentence structure, flawless grammar
12.0 pts
Very Good
Error-free, easy to read writing style, well practiced and polished use of language
8.0 pts
Good
Good basic writing style, easy to read, few errors, almost entirely in author’s won words, little paraphrasing or unnecessary quotation
4.0 pts
Satisfactory
Mostly basic, correct writing style, relatively few errors and little awkwardness, minimal use of unnecessary quotation or paraphrasing
0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Serious errors and awkwardness, excessive use of quotation in place of author’s own words, excessive paraphrasing
16.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0