Need help with the Final Paper

Anonymous
timer Asked: Apr 21st, 2017

Question description

The course is Teaching Education. Please compete the two parts in the requirement.

I already have my general ideas written down in the attachment and please add more and compose the ideas into an essay.

Please Read it carefully

TE 250 Final Project Assignment Description The purpose of this final project is for you to reflect upon, analyze and demonstrate your learning in this course. This project has THREE parts:(Do the highlight in red,Second one for one page, And third one for five page double spaced, 12 pt font)MLA times new roman .) 1) Oral Proposal – 25 points 2) Project Document – 75 points 3) Project Narrative – 100 points There are ppt attached also, please take it as reference. Here, you will prepare a 3-5 minute presentation where you discuss your project proposal in order for your instructor and peers to give you feedback to include in your project submission & reflection narrative. Your oral proposal should include an introduction of your service learning placement, your initial thoughts about your proposed recommendations for your service learning site, what social identity markers you will consider in your project, and what course concepts you think are applicable to your analysis of your project. My Experience and Observation(Even though its in the oral part, you can mention it in the project document) • • I went to two primary schools and firstly compare them. And I will compare them to my Chinese primary school as well. For my work: Check students reading Check words • • • In this process: • The pattern of the two schools is very similar • The different things is how students seat in class • And American education based on practice, pay attention to teaching form of creation. • US‘s education pays more attention to raise student’s selfconfidence, independence, spirit of supporting oneself. • Time is flexible • children in the activities, sports activities time is abundant, activity places is everywhere. Project “Document”–— (75 points) 2) For this project, you will reflect upon and analyze course concepts and experiences by making specific recommendations to your Service Learning placement. In your analysis, reflection and recommendations, you will need to consider at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester (e.g. race, socioeconomic class, Language diversity, Ability, sexuality, etc), ONE of which must be your racial identity.(My observation about RACE:What’s interesting is kids would gather together mostly by their race like Asians with Asians, whites and whites and blacks with blacks. This happens because people usually feel more comfortable with people who are similar backgrounds to their own. But it also happens because many of us are used to living in segregated communities Language: The language diversity affects plenty of things during my communication. From the article I read before, children will feel nervous and depressed when they are speaking English and when they are limited to their native language (P, N. (2010). Linguistic diversity in U.S. classrooms. In B. S (Ed.), (pp. 227-239)). What I was thinking is not just children but also the adults will feel nervous and depressed if they are not speaking their native language. Ability:I am not sure about this part. But I have the general direction: what’s the difference between the kids who possess high learning ability and low learning ability. And the answer might be the kids who have higher concentration have higher learning ability and so on. • Recommendation for writing this part • TO MUCH FREEDOM( add more based on the concept. The purpose is to find the disadvantages of American primary school compare to Chinese primary school.) • Students can walk in more times in class, this situation will lead another students to distraction. FOR A LONG TIME, The gap between students will be great. • Knowledge gap is too large • Mental health education should implement the layering teaching according to students' different aims (Please write more for the identity marker) Consider the following GUIDELINES when creating your project “document.” Goal: Your goal in this project is to REFLECT, ANALYZE and DEMONSTRATE your UNDERSTANDING of TE 250 course concepts and experiences.(The purpose of our course to how to avoid discrimination on race, gender and homosexuality, moreover, how to reach the equality on education) Role: Imagine that you are an ally to the constituents served by your Service Learning placement. So, in essence, YOU are YOU! Audience: The program coordinator, teacher, administrator or whomever is a key decision maker and/or is in charge of training volunteers who identify as you do with respect to at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester. Again, ONE of which MUST be your RACIAL IDENTITY. You are free to choose the other social identity marker you will consider. (Please note you are to consider THREE social identity markers in your oral proposal, however in your final project, you need only include a minimum of TWO, one of which is your racial identity.) Race, language, ability. Situation: You are asked to help create training materials for future volunteers to your Service Learning placement. Considering two social identity markers, and considering the context of your specific service -learning placement, you must make 3-4 specific recommendations in order to help future volunteers consider issues of social equity (and/or inequity) within your Service Learning site. ( I already mention two examples above, and you can mention the disadvantages about the foreign school education. Procedures & Products: This is where you describe and display what you are recommending. Will you recommend changes to the orientation program you encountered? If so, you could submit a detailed outline for a new training manual. Will you recommend a series of videos and/or create a video for volunteers to watch and discuss? Will you recommend activities such the Privilege Walk and/or the Arabic word search and/or the Gender Unicorn? Possible media: Web pages, blogs, Prezis, Powerpoints, Video (Please upload to YouTube & provide link), Song, Poster, etc. BE CREATIVE!(Try to avoid the introduction or conclusion, better to have more discussion. Because I will make a poster according to the paper later) The Project Document is worth 75 points: Quality of Recommendations – 40 points Consideration of Audience – 15 points Project Document Quality – 20 points 3) Project Narrative –– 100 points Here is where you EXPLAIN the recommendations you are making. (Since the American kids in the classroom behave without a sense of discipline. They can go to bathroom and eat snacks at anytime. Therefore, the change of the surrounding would not let them be really concentrate in the content. However, the teacher seem not really control kid’s behavior. Some kids who have better concentration have better grade. For those who have lower concentration have lower grade. My recommendation is , I think American teacher should use the Positive Reinforcement which are generally used by Chinese teacher to encourage kid for better education. Please write more examples like this.)You should explicitly analyze (i.e. confirm, challenge, compare, connect to, etc) how the recommendations you make are appropriate for you service learning site considering the identity markers you choose to include in your analysis of what makes a good ally. You will also need to include evidence for your recommendations’ appropriateness utilizing at least 4 (FOUR) of the course readings.(I will provide them in the end) Your narrative should also include what grade you think you deserve on this project and your justification for that grade. Please note, that “…because I worked really hard” and/or “…because I put a lot of time into this project” are NOT sufficient justifications for a grade.(My suggestion: sine it’s my first year in the US, English is my second language. I am going through a hard time for accustomed into a new environment of listening, speaking and writing in a new language. I have also made a great effort to do better in this course. I am overcoming my fear to doing the best.) Your narrative must also include evidence that you have considered the feedback obtained from your oral presentation. * Length: The project narrative should be a MINIMUM of 1(ONE) page single-spaced if you are submitting a medium other than a traditional paper. If you choose to submit a traditional paper, it must be at least 5 (FIVE) pages double-spaced. (Don’t pay attention to the differences, Be respectful of your supervisors…please write more after this) The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling 10 pts: Organization & Flow (Please take a look and remind in your mind)GRADING RUBIC 90-100% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Exceptional Work. All of the criteria are address with great detail. Author goes well beyond what is required and makes strong, nuanced and deep connections between recommendations, course concepts, & service learning experience. 80-89% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Adequate/Above Average work. All of the criteria are addressed with adequate detail. Author goes beyond what is required and makes strong connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 70-79% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Average work. Most of the criteria are addressed with sufficient detail. Author addresses what is required and makes logical connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 60-69% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Minimally Acceptable work. Some of the criteria are addressed, however more detail is needed to fully comprehend author’s intent. Author addresses some of what is required and makes obvious connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 0-59% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Unacceptable work. Few or none of the criteria are addressed. Very little detail is included. Author omits significant portions of the assignment. Author addresses few of project requirement and makes little to no explicit and/or implicit connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings & service learning experience. GRADING RUBRIC: Project “Document”– Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm (75 points) GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS WITHIN A GIVEN CRITERIA A - 90-100% of points within a grading category; Exceptional, high quality work. B - 80-89% of points within a grading category; Above Average, good quality work. C - 70-79% of points within a grading category; Average quality work. D - 60-69% of points within a grading category; Minimally acceptable work. F - 0-59% of points within a grading category; Unacceptable work. Quality of Recommendations – 40 points A – HIGH quality recommendations are those that are innovative, creative, appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and populations served. These recommendations challenge to organization to consider what they are not currently and provide viable and reasonable means of accommodating the changes suggested. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. B – GOOD quality recommendations are those that are appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and population served. These recommendations would improve functionality for the organization and populations served but don’t necessarily push the organization to consider something new or innovative. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. C – AVERAGE recommendations are those that are appropriate for the organization but don’t necessarily make the organization more functional for the populations served. D – MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE recommendations recognize a change needs to be made by the organization, but it is not very clear how the recommendation is beneficial for the organization and/or the population served. F – UNACCEPTABLE recommendations are those that are not appropriate for the organization or the populations served. Because these recommendations do not adequately consider the stated or implied context of the organization or consider the populations served in meaningful and logical ways, these recommendations have the potential to be harmful to the organization and population served. Consideration of Audience – 15 points A –A project document that considers the audience in EXCEPTIONAL ways is one that extensively and explicitly demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state and/or show how the recommendation addresses a specific audience, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. B - A project document that considers the audience in GOOD ways is one that adequately demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state how the recommendation addresses a specific audience within the document itself, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. C - A project document that considers the audience in AVERAGE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is somewhat clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. D - A project document that considers the audience in MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of an audience but this audience changes throughout the document without clear explanation. For example, in a pamphlet for future classroom volunteers, one recommendation is for a future volunteer while another suggests parents get more involved in their children’s classrooms. F - A project document that considers the audience in UNACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates little to no consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is not at all clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. Project Document Quality – 20 points A –HIGH quality project documents are innovative, creative, polished and published with great attention to detail. For example, in a video, it is clear the author practiced, perhaps memorized what they would say instead of reading from note cards. A pamphlet to be used in volunteer training is neat, well organized, and is aesthetically well presented. A letter to future volunteers has language that is appropriate and accessible to a wide range of potential volunteers. A lesson plan is clear enough for a substitute teacher with no experience could easily understand and follow. B – GOOD quality project documents are creative and published with much attention to detail. They would be exceptional with perhaps one more round of revision. These products are well organized and aesthetically pleasing. Language used is accessible to most readers. C – AVERAGE quality project documents are published with a few errors. This product is “safe.” It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates an understanding of an issue and shows how the recommendations made will address that issue. While mostly well organized, with one or more rounds of revision, this could have been a “GOOD” or “EXCEPTIONAL” quality project. D- MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with errors. It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates beginning understanding of an issue and begins to show how the recommendations made could address that issue but the connection between the recommendation and the context is not clear. With more organization and more attention to detail, this project would be average. F – UNACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with a significant errors. It is unorganized and haphazardly presented. 3) Project Narrative – Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm – 100 points The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. A –Author makes strong explicit and logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to rationalize and validate the appropriateness of the recommendation in nuanced and sophisticated ways. Author is able to thoroughly explain how recommendations are in alignment with and extend claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. B - Author makes logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to support the inclusion of the recommendation. Author is able to adequately explain how recommendations are in alignment with claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. C - Author makes connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Author shows how recommendations are similar to claims made in readings, class discussions and videos D - Author makes briefly mentions course concepts and/or readings but the connection to recommendations made is unclear, weakly related and/or incorrectly interpreted analyzed. F- Author does not mention any course concepts and/or readings. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. A – Author is able to explicitly explain with logical, deeply thoughtful and thorough analysis, how the consideration of specific social identity markers validates and substantiates the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position AND how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. B - Author is able to explicitly explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position OR how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. C - Author attempts to explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or don’t help the author argue for the appropriateness of the recommendation. Author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project). D - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Alternatively, author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) but does not make a connection between identity markers and recommendations. F - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Author does not acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. A – Author is able to provide a strong argument for giving themselves any particular grade (So, yes, one could argue very well why they deserve a C and get full credit for this criteria). Argument includes specific details about how the author approached working on the project and monitored themselves throughout. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what exceptional (or otherwise) work looks like and provides evidence about how their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. B - Author is able to provide an argument for the “grade” they give themselves. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like and provides at least one example in their project that provides evidence their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. C – Author attempts to argue for the “grade” they give themselves but does not demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like, nor do they provide examples that substantiate the grade they give themselves. D – Author equates effort and time with quality but does not critically analyze their thinking throughout the project. F – Author neglects to evaluate themselves or simply states what grade they think they should get without any analysis of why they deserve that grade. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. A –Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers and/or other sources (e.g. service learning supervisor, service learning constituents, etc). If they received only “good” remarks from peer, this author followed up by asking for more constructive and/or substantive feedback. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” B - Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” C – Author shares feedback given by peers but does not show that they responded to it in the project. D – Author attaches feedback form to project document but does not mention it in project narrative. F – There is no mention of and/or consideration of feedback from peers. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling A – No mistakes or errors. Formal, academic language is consistently used. Author creatively, coherently and seamlessly answers project criteria. B – A few mistakes and errors. Formal, academic language is consistent throughout the document. C – Several mistakes, errors. Author alternates between formal and informal language throughout document. D – Enough mistakes to impede understanding. Author uses mostly informal language including awkward word choices and is inconsistent with tense and subject/verb agreement. F – Consistently misspelled words. Completely informal and colloquial language used. Demonstrates significant misunderstanding of correct use of tense and subject/verb agreement. 10 pts: Organization & Flow A – Extremely well organized and flows logically. B – Organized and flows well. C – Somewhat organized. Flow could be improved with better organization and logic. Answers project criteria in exact order of project description. D – Haphazardly presented. Answers most project criteria. F – No logical organization of the document is discernible Reading materials provided in class, please use at least 4 evidences from them for your recommendations’ appropriateness Ally of Minorities Edgington:’’Moving Beyond White Guilt Safe Environment for learning LEBT reading Eliminating Cultural Bias from the Classroom Christensen :’’Unlearning the Myths” Gender Lober:’’The Social Construction of Gender Cultural Sensitivity and Integrations Smitherman, Christensen ELLs form english language learners to emergent Bilinguals Ability 10 ways to help students with ADHD Concentrate by Sara Jackson Here are more reading you can pick from them:
TE 250 Final Project Assignment Description The purpose of this final project is for you to reflect upon, analyze and demonstrate your learning in this course. This project has THREE parts:(Do the highlight in red,Second one for one page, And third one for five page double spaced, 12 pt font)MLA times new roman .) 1) Oral Proposal – 25 points 2) Project Document – 75 points 3) Project Narrative – 100 points There are ppt attached also, please take it as reference. Here, you will prepare a 3-5 minute presentation where you discuss your project proposal in order for your instructor and peers to give you feedback to include in your project submission & reflection narrative. Your oral proposal should include an introduction of your service learning placement, your initial thoughts about your proposed recommendations for your service learning site, what social identity markers you will consider in your project, and what course concepts you think are applicable to your analysis of your project. My Experience and Observation(Even though its in the oral part, you can mention it in the project document) • • I went to two primary schools and firstly compare them. And I will compare them to my Chinese primary school as well. For my work: Check students reading Check words • • • In this process: • The pattern of the two schools is very similar • The different things is how students seat in class • And American education based on practice, pay attention to teaching form of creation. • US‘s education pays more attention to raise student’s selfconfidence, independence, spirit of supporting oneself. • Time is flexible • children in the activities, sports activities time is abundant, activity places is everywhere. Project “Document”–— (75 points) 2) For this project, you will reflect upon and analyze course concepts and experiences by making specific recommendations to your Service Learning placement. In your analysis, reflection and recommendations, you will need to consider at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester (e.g. race, socioeconomic class, Language diversity, Ability, sexuality, etc), ONE of which must be your racial identity.(My observation about RACE:What’s interesting is kids would gather together mostly by their race like Asians with Asians, whites and whites and blacks with blacks. This happens because people usually feel more comfortable with people who are similar backgrounds to their own. But it also happens because many of us are used to living in segregated communities Language: The language diversity affects plenty of things during my communication. From the article I read before, children will feel nervous and depressed when they are speaking English and when they are limited to their native language (P, N. (2010). Linguistic diversity in U.S. classrooms. In B. S (Ed.), (pp. 227-239)). What I was thinking is not just children but also the adults will feel nervous and depressed if they are not speaking their native language. Ability:I am not sure about this part. But I have the general direction: what’s the difference between the kids who possess high learning ability and low learning ability. And the answer might be the kids who have higher concentration have higher learning ability and so on. • Recommendation for writing this part • TO MUCH FREEDOM( add more based on the concept. The purpose is to find the disadvantages of American primary school compare to Chinese primary school.) • Students can walk in more times in class, this situation will lead another students to distraction. FOR A LONG TIME, The gap between students will be great. • Knowledge gap is too large • Mental health education should implement the layering teaching according to students' different aims (Please write more for the identity marker) Consider the following GUIDELINES when creating your project “document.” Goal: Your goal in this project is to REFLECT, ANALYZE and DEMONSTRATE your UNDERSTANDING of TE 250 course concepts and experiences.(The purpose of our course to how to avoid discrimination on race, gender and homosexuality, moreover, how to reach the equality on education) Role: Imagine that you are an ally to the constituents served by your Service Learning placement. So, in essence, YOU are YOU! Audience: The program coordinator, teacher, administrator or whomever is a key decision maker and/or is in charge of training volunteers who identify as you do with respect to at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester. Again, ONE of which MUST be your RACIAL IDENTITY. You are free to choose the other social identity marker you will consider. (Please note you are to consider THREE social identity markers in your oral proposal, however in your final project, you need only include a minimum of TWO, one of which is your racial identity.) Race, language, ability. Situation: You are asked to help create training materials for future volunteers to your Service Learning placement. Considering two social identity markers, and considering the context of your specific service -learning placement, you must make 3-4 specific recommendations in order to help future volunteers consider issues of social equity (and/or inequity) within your Service Learning site. ( I already mention two examples above, and you can mention the disadvantages about the foreign school education. Procedures & Products: This is where you describe and display what you are recommending. Will you recommend changes to the orientation program you encountered? If so, you could submit a detailed outline for a new training manual. Will you recommend a series of videos and/or create a video for volunteers to watch and discuss? Will you recommend activities such the Privilege Walk and/or the Arabic word search and/or the Gender Unicorn? Possible media: Web pages, blogs, Prezis, Powerpoints, Video (Please upload to YouTube & provide link), Song, Poster, etc. BE CREATIVE!(Try to avoid the introduction or conclusion, better to have more discussion. Because I will make a poster according to the paper later) The Project Document is worth 75 points: Quality of Recommendations – 40 points Consideration of Audience – 15 points Project Document Quality – 20 points 3) Project Narrative –– 100 points Here is where you EXPLAIN the recommendations you are making. (Since the American kids in the classroom behave without a sense of discipline. They can go to bathroom and eat snacks at anytime. Therefore, the change of the surrounding would not let them be really concentrate in the content. However, the teacher seem not really control kid’s behavior. Some kids who have better concentration have better grade. For those who have lower concentration have lower grade. My recommendation is , I think American teacher should use the Positive Reinforcement which are generally used by Chinese teacher to encourage kid for better education. Please write more examples like this.)You should explicitly analyze (i.e. confirm, challenge, compare, connect to, etc) how the recommendations you make are appropriate for you service learning site considering the identity markers you choose to include in your analysis of what makes a good ally. You will also need to include evidence for your recommendations’ appropriateness utilizing at least 4 (FOUR) of the course readings.(I will provide them in the end) Your narrative should also include what grade you think you deserve on this project and your justification for that grade. Please note, that “…because I worked really hard” and/or “…because I put a lot of time into this project” are NOT sufficient justifications for a grade.(My suggestion: sine it’s my first year in the US, English is my second language. I am going through a hard time for accustomed into a new environment of listening, speaking and writing in a new language. I have also made a great effort to do better in this course. I am overcoming my fear to doing the best.) Your narrative must also include evidence that you have considered the feedback obtained from your oral presentation. * Length: The project narrative should be a MINIMUM of 1(ONE) page single-spaced if you are submitting a medium other than a traditional paper. If you choose to submit a traditional paper, it must be at least 5 (FIVE) pages double-spaced. (Don’t pay attention to the differences, Be respectful of your supervisors…please write more after this) The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling 10 pts: Organization & Flow (Please take a look and remind in your mind)GRADING RUBIC 90-100% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Exceptional Work. All of the criteria are address with great detail. Author goes well beyond what is required and makes strong, nuanced and deep connections between recommendations, course concepts, & service learning experience. 80-89% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Adequate/Above Average work. All of the criteria are addressed with adequate detail. Author goes beyond what is required and makes strong connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 70-79% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Average work. Most of the criteria are addressed with sufficient detail. Author addresses what is required and makes logical connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 60-69% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Minimally Acceptable work. Some of the criteria are addressed, however more detail is needed to fully comprehend author’s intent. Author addresses some of what is required and makes obvious connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 0-59% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Unacceptable work. Few or none of the criteria are addressed. Very little detail is included. Author omits significant portions of the assignment. Author addresses few of project requirement and makes little to no explicit and/or implicit connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings & service learning experience. GRADING RUBRIC: Project “Document”– Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm (75 points) GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS WITHIN A GIVEN CRITERIA A - 90-100% of points within a grading category; Exceptional, high quality work. B - 80-89% of points within a grading category; Above Average, good quality work. C - 70-79% of points within a grading category; Average quality work. D - 60-69% of points within a grading category; Minimally acceptable work. F - 0-59% of points within a grading category; Unacceptable work. Quality of Recommendations – 40 points A – HIGH quality recommendations are those that are innovative, creative, appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and populations served. These recommendations challenge to organization to consider what they are not currently and provide viable and reasonable means of accommodating the changes suggested. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. B – GOOD quality recommendations are those that are appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and population served. These recommendations would improve functionality for the organization and populations served but don’t necessarily push the organization to consider something new or innovative. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. C – AVERAGE recommendations are those that are appropriate for the organization but don’t necessarily make the organization more functional for the populations served. D – MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE recommendations recognize a change needs to be made by the organization, but it is not very clear how the recommendation is beneficial for the organization and/or the population served. F – UNACCEPTABLE recommendations are those that are not appropriate for the organization or the populations served. Because these recommendations do not adequately consider the stated or implied context of the organization or consider the populations served in meaningful and logical ways, these recommendations have the potential to be harmful to the organization and population served. Consideration of Audience – 15 points A –A project document that considers the audience in EXCEPTIONAL ways is one that extensively and explicitly demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state and/or show how the recommendation addresses a specific audience, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. B - A project document that considers the audience in GOOD ways is one that adequately demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state how the recommendation addresses a specific audience within the document itself, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. C - A project document that considers the audience in AVERAGE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is somewhat clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. D - A project document that considers the audience in MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of an audience but this audience changes throughout the document without clear explanation. For example, in a pamphlet for future classroom volunteers, one recommendation is for a future volunteer while another suggests parents get more involved in their children’s classrooms. F - A project document that considers the audience in UNACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates little to no consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is not at all clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. Project Document Quality – 20 points A –HIGH quality project documents are innovative, creative, polished and published with great attention to detail. For example, in a video, it is clear the author practiced, perhaps memorized what they would say instead of reading from note cards. A pamphlet to be used in volunteer training is neat, well organized, and is aesthetically well presented. A letter to future volunteers has language that is appropriate and accessible to a wide range of potential volunteers. A lesson plan is clear enough for a substitute teacher with no experience could easily understand and follow. B – GOOD quality project documents are creative and published with much attention to detail. They would be exceptional with perhaps one more round of revision. These products are well organized and aesthetically pleasing. Language used is accessible to most readers. C – AVERAGE quality project documents are published with a few errors. This product is “safe.” It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates an understanding of an issue and shows how the recommendations made will address that issue. While mostly well organized, with one or more rounds of revision, this could have been a “GOOD” or “EXCEPTIONAL” quality project. D- MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with errors. It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates beginning understanding of an issue and begins to show how the recommendations made could address that issue but the connection between the recommendation and the context is not clear. With more organization and more attention to detail, this project would be average. F – UNACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with a significant errors. It is unorganized and haphazardly presented. 3) Project Narrative – Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm – 100 points The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. A –Author makes strong explicit and logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to rationalize and validate the appropriateness of the recommendation in nuanced and sophisticated ways. Author is able to thoroughly explain how recommendations are in alignment with and extend claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. B - Author makes logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to support the inclusion of the recommendation. Author is able to adequately explain how recommendations are in alignment with claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. C - Author makes connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Author shows how recommendations are similar to claims made in readings, class discussions and videos D - Author makes briefly mentions course concepts and/or readings but the connection to recommendations made is unclear, weakly related and/or incorrectly interpreted analyzed. F- Author does not mention any course concepts and/or readings. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. A – Author is able to explicitly explain with logical, deeply thoughtful and thorough analysis, how the consideration of specific social identity markers validates and substantiates the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position AND how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. B - Author is able to explicitly explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position OR how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. C - Author attempts to explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or don’t help the author argue for the appropriateness of the recommendation. Author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project). D - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Alternatively, author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) but does not make a connection between identity markers and recommendations. F - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Author does not acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. A – Author is able to provide a strong argument for giving themselves any particular grade (So, yes, one could argue very well why they deserve a C and get full credit for this criteria). Argument includes specific details about how the author approached working on the project and monitored themselves throughout. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what exceptional (or otherwise) work looks like and provides evidence about how their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. B - Author is able to provide an argument for the “grade” they give themselves. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like and provides at least one example in their project that provides evidence their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. C – Author attempts to argue for the “grade” they give themselves but does not demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like, nor do they provide examples that substantiate the grade they give themselves. D – Author equates effort and time with quality but does not critically analyze their thinking throughout the project. F – Author neglects to evaluate themselves or simply states what grade they think they should get without any analysis of why they deserve that grade. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. A –Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers and/or other sources (e.g. service learning supervisor, service learning constituents, etc). If they received only “good” remarks from peer, this author followed up by asking for more constructive and/or substantive feedback. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” B - Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” C – Author shares feedback given by peers but does not show that they responded to it in the project. D – Author attaches feedback form to project document but does not mention it in project narrative. F – There is no mention of and/or consideration of feedback from peers. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling A – No mistakes or errors. Formal, academic language is consistently used. Author creatively, coherently and seamlessly answers project criteria. B – A few mistakes and errors. Formal, academic language is consistent throughout the document. C – Several mistakes, errors. Author alternates between formal and informal language throughout document. D – Enough mistakes to impede understanding. Author uses mostly informal language including awkward word choices and is inconsistent with tense and subject/verb agreement. F – Consistently misspelled words. Completely informal and colloquial language used. Demonstrates significant misunderstanding of correct use of tense and subject/verb agreement. 10 pts: Organization & Flow A – Extremely well organized and flows logically. B – Organized and flows well. C – Somewhat organized. Flow could be improved with better organization and logic. Answers project criteria in exact order of project description. D – Haphazardly presented. Answers most project criteria. F – No logical organization of the document is discernible Reading materials provided in class, please use at least 4 evidences from them for your recommendations’ appropriateness Ally of Minorities Edgington:’’Moving Beyond White Guilt Safe Environment for learning LEBT reading Eliminating Cultural Bias from the Classroom Christensen :’’Unlearning the Myths” Gender Lober:’’The Social Construction of Gender Cultural Sensitivity and Integrations Smitherman, Christensen ELLs form english language learners to emergent Bilinguals Ability 10 ways to help students with ADHD Concentrate by Sara Jackson Here are more reading you can pick from them:
TE 250 Final Project Assignment Description The purpose of this final project is for you to reflect upon, analyze and demonstrate your learning in this course. This project has THREE parts:(Do the highlight in red,Second one for one page, And third one for five page double spaced, 12 pt font)MLA times new roman .) 1) Oral Proposal – 25 points 2) Project Document – 75 points 3) Project Narrative – 100 points There are ppt attached also, please take it as reference. Here, you will prepare a 3-5 minute presentation where you discuss your project proposal in order for your instructor and peers to give you feedback to include in your project submission & reflection narrative. Your oral proposal should include an introduction of your service learning placement, your initial thoughts about your proposed recommendations for your service learning site, what social identity markers you will consider in your project, and what course concepts you think are applicable to your analysis of your project. My Experience and Observation(Even though its in the oral part, you can mention it in the project document) • • I went to two primary schools and firstly compare them. And I will compare them to my Chinese primary school as well. For my work: Check students reading Check words • • • In this process: • The pattern of the two schools is very similar • The different things is how students seat in class • And American education based on practice, pay attention to teaching form of creation. • US‘s education pays more attention to raise student’s selfconfidence, independence, spirit of supporting oneself. • Time is flexible • children in the activities, sports activities time is abundant, activity places is everywhere. Project “Document”–— (75 points) 2) For this project, you will reflect upon and analyze course concepts and experiences by making specific recommendations to your Service Learning placement. In your analysis, reflection and recommendations, you will need to consider at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester (e.g. race, socioeconomic class, Language diver- sity, Ability, sexuality, etc), ONE of which must be your racial identity. (My observation about RACE:What’s interesting is kids would gather together mostly by their race like Asians with Asians, whites and whites and blacks with blacks. This happens because people usually feel more comfortable with people who are similar backgrounds to their own. But it also happens because many of us are used to living in segregated communities Language: The language diversity affects plenty of things during my communication. From the article I read before, children will feel nervous and depressed when they are speaking English and when they are limited to their native language (P, N. (2010). Linguistic diversity in U.S. classrooms. In B. S (Ed.), (pp. 227239)). What I was thinking is not just children but also the adults will feel nervous and depressed if they are not speaking their native language. Ability:I am not sure about this part. But I have the general direction: what’s the difference between the kids who possess high learning ability and low learning ability. And the answer might be the kids who have higher concentration have higher learning ability and so on. • Recommendation for writing this part • TO MUCH FREEDOM( add more based on the concept. The purpose is to find the disadvantages of American primary school compare to Chinese primary school.) • Students can walk in more times in class, this situation will lead another students to distraction. FOR A LONG TIME, The gap between students will be great. • Knowledge gap is too large • Mental health education should implement the layering teaching according to students' different aims (Please write more for the identity marker) Consider the following GUIDELINES when creating your project “document.” Goal: Your goal in this project is to REFLECT, ANALYZE and DEMONSTRATE your UNDERSTANDING of TE 250 course concepts and experiences.(The purpose of our course to how to avoid discrimination on race, gender and homosexuality, moreover, how to reach the equality on education) Role: Imagine that you are an ally to the constituents served by your Service Learning placement. So, in essence, YOU are YOU! Audience: The program coordinator, teacher, administrator or whomever is a key decision maker and/or is in charge of training volunteers who identify as you do with respect to at least TWO social identity markers we’ve discussed this semester. Again, ONE of which MUST be your RACIAL IDENTITY. You are free to choose the other social identity marker you will consider. (Please note you are to consider THREE social identity markers in your oral proposal, however in your final project, you need only include a minimum of TWO, one of which is your racial identity.) Race, language, ability. Situation: You are asked to help create training materials for future volunteers to your Service Learning placement. Considering two social identity markers, and considering the context of your specific service -learning placement, you must make 3-4 specific recommendations in order to help future volunteers consider issues of social equity (and/or inequity) within your Service Learning site. ( I already mention two examples above, and you can mention the disadvantages about the foreign school education. Procedures & Products: This is where you describe and display what you are recommending. Will you recommend changes to the orientation program you encountered? If so, you could submit a detailed outline for a new training manual. Will you recommend a series of videos and/or create a video for volunteers to watch and discuss? Will you recommend activities such the Privilege Walk and/or the Arabic word search and/or the Gender Unicorn? Possible media: Web pages, blogs, Prezis, Powerpoints, Video (Please upload to YouTube & provide link), Song, Poster, etc. BE CREATIVE!(Try to avoid the introduction or conclusion, better to have more discussion. Because I will make a poster according to the paper later) The Project Document is worth 75 points: Quality of Recommendations – 40 points Consideration of Audience – 15 points Project Document Quality – 20 points 3) Project Narrative –– 100 points Here is where you EXPLAIN the recommendations you are making. (Since the American kids in the classroom behave without a sense of discipline. They can go to bathroom and eat snacks at anytime. Therefore, the change of the surrounding would not let them be really concentrate in the content. However, the teacher seem not really control kid’s behavior. Some kids who have better concentration have better grade. For those who have lower concentration have lower grade. My recommendation is , I think American teacher should use the Positive Reinforcement which are generally used by Chinese teacher to encourage kid for better education. Please write more examples like this.)You should explicitly analyze (i.e. confirm, challenge, compare, connect to, etc) how the recommendations you make are appropriate for you service learning site considering the identity markers you choose to include in your analysis of what makes a good ally. You will also need to include evidence for your recommendations’ appropriateness utilizing at least 4 (FOUR) of the course readings.(I will provide them in the end) Your narrative should also include what grade you think you deserve on this project and your justification for that grade. Please note, that “…because I worked really hard” and/or “…because I put a lot of time into this project” are NOT sufficient justifications for a grade.(My suggestion: sine it’s my first year in the US, English is my second language. I am going through a hard time for accustomed into a new environment of listening, speaking and writing in a new language. I have also made a great effort to do better in this course. I am overcoming my fear to doing the best.) Your narrative must also include evidence that you have considered the feedback obtained from your oral presentation. * Length: The project narrative should be a MINIMUM of 1(ONE) page single-spaced if you are submitting a medium other than a traditional paper. If you choose to submit a traditional paper, it must be at least 5 (FIVE) pages double-spaced. (Don’t pay attention to the differences, Be respectful of your supervisors…please write more after this) The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling 10 pts: Organization & Flow (Please take a look and remind in your mind)GRADING RUBIC 90-100% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Exceptional Work. All of the criteria are address with great detail. Author goes well beyond what is required and makes strong, nuanced and deep connections between recommendations, course concepts, & service learning experience. 80-89% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Adequate/Above Average work. All of the criteria are addressed with adequate detail. Author goes beyond what is required and makes strong connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 70-79% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Average work. Most of the criteria are addressed with sufficient detail. Author addresses what is required and makes logical connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 60-69% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Minimally Acceptable work. Some of the criteria are addressed, however more detail is needed to fully comprehend author’s intent. Author addresses some of what is required and makes obvious connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings, & service learning experience. 0-59% of points within a grading category (see descriptions above) Unacceptable work. Few or none of the criteria are addressed. Very little detail is included. Author omits significant portions of the assignment. Author addresses few of project requirement and makes little to no explicit and/or implicit connections between recommendations, course concepts AND readings & service learning experience. GRADING RUBRIC: Project “Document”– Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm (75 points) GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS WITHIN A GIVEN CRITERIA A - 90-100% of points within a grading category; Exceptional, high quality work. B - 80-89% of points within a grading category; Above Average, good quality work. C - 70-79% of points within a grading category; Average quality work. D - 60-69% of points within a grading category; Minimally acceptable work. F - 0-59% of points within a grading category; Unacceptable work. Quality of Recommendations – 40 points A – HIGH quality recommendations are those that are innovative, creative, appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and populations served. These recommendations challenge to organization to consider what they are not currently and provide viable and reasonable means of accommodating the changes suggested. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. B – GOOD quality recommendations are those that are appropriate, relevant and useful to the organization and population served. These recommendations would improve functionality for the organization and populations served but don’t necessarily push the organization to consider something new or innovative. Within the document, the author has provided enough context for a reader to discern that significant issues are being addressed specifically. C – AVERAGE recommendations are those that are appropriate for the organization but don’t necessarily make the organization more functional for the populations served. D – MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE recommendations recognize a change needs to be made by the organization, but it is not very clear how the recommendation is beneficial for the organization and/or the population served. F – UNACCEPTABLE recommendations are those that are not appropriate for the organization or the populations served. Because these recommendations do not adequately consider the stated or implied context of the organization or consider the populations served in meaningful and logical ways, these recommendations have the potential to be harmful to the organization and population served. Consideration of Audience – 15 points A –A project document that considers the audience in EXCEPTIONAL ways is one that extensively and explicitly demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state and/or show how the recommendation addresses a specific audience, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. B - A project document that considers the audience in GOOD ways is one that adequately demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made and FOR whom the recommendations are made (these may not be the same). If the author is not able to explicitly state how the recommendation addresses a specific audience within the document itself, it is still very clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. C - A project document that considers the audience in AVERAGE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is somewhat clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. D - A project document that considers the audience in MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates consideration of an audience but this audience changes throughout the document without clear explanation. For example, in a pamphlet for future classroom volunteers, one recommendation is for a future volunteer while another suggests parents get more involved in their children’s classrooms. F - A project document that considers the audience in UNACCEPTABLE ways is one that demonstrates little to no consideration of TO whom the recommendations are made. It is not at all clear to any reasonable reader who the document is intended to speak to. Project Document Quality – 20 points A –HIGH quality project documents are innovative, creative, polished and published with great attention to detail. For example, in a video, it is clear the author practiced, perhaps memorized what they would say instead of reading from note cards. A pamphlet to be used in volunteer training is neat, well organized, and is aesthetically well presented. A letter to future volunteers has language that is appropriate and accessible to a wide range of potential volunteers. A lesson plan is clear enough for a substitute teacher with no experience could easily understand and follow. B – GOOD quality project documents are creative and published with much attention to detail. They would be exceptional with perhaps one more round of revision. These products are well organized and aesthetically pleasing. Language used is accessible to most readers. C – AVERAGE quality project documents are published with a few errors. This product is “safe.” It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates an understanding of an issue and shows how the recommendations made will address that issue. While mostly well organized, with one or more rounds of revision, this could have been a “GOOD” or “EXCEPTIONAL” quality project. D- MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with errors. It is not creative but “does the job” sufficiently. It demonstrates beginning understanding of an issue and begins to show how the recommendations made could address that issue but the connection between the recommendation and the context is not clear. With more organization and more attention to detail, this project would be average. F – UNACCEPTABLE - quality project documents are published with a significant errors. It is unorganized and haphazardly presented. 3) Project Narrative – Monday, May 1 by 5:00pm – 100 points The Project Narrative is worth 100 points Connection of recommendations to course concepts – 40 pts. A –Author makes strong explicit and logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to rationalize and validate the appropriateness of the recommendation in nuanced and sophisticated ways. Author is able to thoroughly explain how recommendations are in alignment with and extend claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. B - Author makes logical connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Course concepts are used to support the inclusion of the recommendation. Author is able to adequately explain how recommendations are in alignment with claims made in readings, class discussions and videos. C - Author makes connections between course concepts and/or readings and recommendations made. Author shows how recommendations are similar to claims made in readings, class discussions and videos D - Author makes briefly mentions course concepts and/or readings but the connection to recommendations made is unclear, weakly related and/or incorrectly interpreted analyzed. F- Author does not mention any course concepts and/or readings. Connection of recommendations to social identity markers – 20 pts. A – Author is able to explicitly explain with logical, deeply thoughtful and thorough analysis, how the consideration of specific social identity markers validates and substantiates the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position AND how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. B - Author is able to explicitly explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made. Author is able to explain how their own position OR how the position of the population served (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) should be and has been considered when making the recommendations they pose. C - Author attempts to explain how the consideration of specific social identity markers aligns with the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or don’t help the author argue for the appropriateness of the recommendation. Author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project). D - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Alternatively, author acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) but does not make a connection between identity markers and recommendations. F - Author mentions specific social identity markers briefly and attempts to tie them to the recommendations made, but the connections are weak and/or are actually contradictory to intended goal of the project. Author does not acknowledges their own position (with respect to each identity marker discussed in the project) Self-Evaluation – 10 pts. A – Author is able to provide a strong argument for giving themselves any particular grade (So, yes, one could argue very well why they deserve a C and get full credit for this criteria). Argument includes specific details about how the author approached working on the project and monitored themselves throughout. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what exceptional (or otherwise) work looks like and provides evidence about how their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. B - Author is able to provide an argument for the “grade” they give themselves. Author is able to demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like and provides at least one example in their project that provides evidence their project is an example of the grade they give themselves. C – Author attempts to argue for the “grade” they give themselves but does not demonstrate their understanding of what good (or otherwise) work looks like, nor do they provide examples that substantiate the grade they give themselves. D – Author equates effort and time with quality but does not critically analyze their thinking throughout the project. F – Author neglects to evaluate themselves or simply states what grade they think they should get without any analysis of why they deserve that grade. Integration of oral presentation feedback -10 pts. A –Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers and/or other sources (e.g. service learning supervisor, service learning constituents, etc). If they received only “good” remarks from peer, this author followed up by asking for more constructive and/or substantive feedback. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” B - Author explains in great detail how they responded to feedback given by peers. Author then explains how and/or if they decided to change their project in response to feedback. If they did not take the suggestions given in feedback, they are able to explain why they chose to continue with their project “as is.” C – Author shares feedback given by peers but does not show that they responded to it in the project. D – Author attaches feedback form to project document but does not mention it in project narrative. F – There is no mention of and/or consideration of feedback from peers. Mechanics (20 pts.) 10 pts: Grammar & Spelling A – No mistakes or errors. Formal, academic language is consistently used. Author creatively, coherently and seamlessly answers project criteria. B – A few mistakes and errors. Formal, academic language is consistent throughout the document. C – Several mistakes, errors. Author alternates between formal and informal language throughout document. D – Enough mistakes to impede understanding. Author uses mostly informal language including awkward word choices and is inconsistent with tense and subject/verb agreement. F – Consistently misspelled words. Completely informal and colloquial language used. Demonstrates significant misunderstanding of correct use of tense and subject/verb agreement. 10 pts: Organization & Flow A – Extremely well organized and flows logically. B – Organized and flows well. C – Somewhat organized. Flow could be improved with better organization and logic. Answers project criteria in exact order of project description. D – Haphazardly presented. Answers most project criteria. F – No logical organization of the document is discernible Reading materials provided in class, please use at least 4 evidences from them for your recommendations’ appropriateness Ally of Minorities Edgington:’’Moving Beyond White Guilt Safe Environment for learning LEBT reading Eliminating Cultural Bias from the Classroom Christensen :’’Unlearning the Myths” Gender Lober:’’The Social Construction of Gender Cultural Sensitivity and Integrations Smitherman, Christensen ELLs form english language learners to emergent Bilinguals Ability 10 ways to help students with ADHD Concentrate by Sara Jackson Here are more reading you can pick from them:

Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Studypool Tutor
School: Purdue University
Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students
flag Report DMCA
Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors