Foundations: Bloc Synthesis Project Assessment

EDFN 211/241

Foundations Bloc Synthesis Project Rubric

STUDENT INFORMATION
EVALUATION
Unsatisfactory (1)Basic (2)Proficient (3)Superior (4)

1. Complementary and Distinct

Project offers very little substantive course content. Ideas presented could be true without attending courses. Creative element or project metaphor may be overly prescriptive, shortsighted or lack fundamental understanding of students or teaching.Project offers general summary and/or lists of course content concepts, ideas, or insights. Very little depth of understanding provided, though some attempt may be present or inferred. Creative element, not thorough assessment of course themes, is centered.Project provides consistent evaluation of course content across several areas but may miss 1-2 opportunities to showcase depth of understanding. Project may not provide a cohesive metaphor and/or creative element is not well connected.Project synthesizes course ideas into a seamless narrative, creative metaphor, or analysis. Insights reveal deep engagement and understanding of course material, as well as an apt ability to apply, transfer, and/or align ideas to new educational situation and current events.
Rating
Unsatisfactory (1)Basic (2)Proficient (3)Superior (4)
2. Knowing What to Teach vs. How to TeachProject lacks insight, repeats previously stated information and/or fails to address the prompt.Project may focus one aspect of the prompt (what or how) with more depth than the other, though both components are present. Project may leave unanswered questions and/or generalize teaching methods, students, and/or teaching context.Project highlights both aspects of the prompt well. Project may focus on one aspect of instruction, student engagement, and/or the learning context that limits a more expanded understanding of the nuances between both. This, however, does not detract from students’ ability to showcase consistent application of ideas to how teachers navigate curriculum, instruction, and student growth.Project provides ample realistic application and student-centered ideas about content, classroom management, engaging families, and working within a public school. Project incorporates field-based observations and course content to showcase how/why “teaching is complicated.”
Rating
Unsatisfactory (1)Basic (2)Proficient (3)Superior (4)
3. Teachers are Committed to Students’ LearningProject embodies platitudes and/or cliched notions of effective teaching without substantive insights or connections to course themes.Project summarizes and/or lists applicably NBPTS/CRSE standards but offers little depth of understanding of how/why effective educators embody these dispositions. Little to no mention of complementary course content or may repeat previously stated examples or ideas.

Project provides meaningful insights about educator effectiveness through some use of NBPTS/CRSE standards. Project may require additional details and/or examples to deepen assertions made.Project highlights NBPTS/CRSE standards to clearly articulate the dispositions, instructional methods, and student engagement strategies that exemplify effective educators use with their students. Student uses field experience as a tool for ongoing reflection, critical assessment (regardless of placement experience), and weaves personal narrative with additional course content to reveal deep understanding.
Rating
Unsatisfactory (1)Basic (2)Proficient (3)Superior (4)
4. Integration of Education Coursework Project does not include any reference to complementary courses or only does so cursorily (i.e. “In our other classes we also learned this idea).Project only generalizes or lists conceptual connections. Insights are vague, not well-evidenced, or reveal a lack of understanding. Requires major revision.

Project provides meaningful insights about educator effectiveness through some use of NBPTS/CRSE standards. Project may require additional details and/or examples to deepen assertions madeProject shows excellent synergy between bloc courses and other classes taken. Project emphasizessimilar themes, areas of divergence, and their implications.
Rating
Unsatisfactory (1)Basic (2)Proficient (3)Superior (4)
5. Formatting & Originality Project contains AI-generated, plagiarized, or improperly sourced materials. *Projects garners an automatic zero, if plagiarized or improperly uses AI-generated content.

Project was submitted improperly or late.

Project meets all guidelines and was submitted on time.

Project meets all guidelines and was submitted on time. Project is an exemplar.
Rating
Overall Evaluation

After printing, you must click 'Submit' to save the form.