FINAL ECPK 480 Portfolio, SP17 semester
Scored Rubric for ____________
| Assessment Component/ NAEYC Standards Element |
Unacceptable (0-2) |
Acceptable (3-4) |
Target (5) |
Score |
Points |
| PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT | |||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
5
|
5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks” |
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all of the sub-areas of the standard. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all of the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvements. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| FAMILY INVOLVEMENT | 0 | ||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
5
|
5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks”
|
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all of the sub-areas of the standard. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all of the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvements. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| GROUP RATIO AND SIZE | 0 | ||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
(5 x 0.5)
|
2.5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks”
|
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all of the sub-areas of the standard. |
5 |
5 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all of the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvements. |
5 |
5 |
| HEALTH AND SAFETY | 0 | ||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
5 |
5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks”
|
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all the sub-areas of the standard. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvements. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| NUTRITION AND FOOD SERVICE | 0 | ||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
5 |
5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks” |
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all of the sub-areas of the standard. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvements. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION | 0 | ||||
| UNDERSTANDING OF STANDARD
NAEYC 1b |
Copied the purpose from the MA Program Standards or used example provided.
Shows little or no understanding of the standard. Does not discuss how standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
Shows minor misconceptions in one or more of the standards areas.
Some discussion, using own words and examples, of why standard is an important part of best practices and how the standard contributes to program quality and children’s development and learning. |
In own words, demonstrates a broad and deep understanding of how the standard’s impact on programming decisions and child outcomes in multiple ways.
Discusses thoroughly key aspects of standard’s implementation. |
5 |
5
|
| EVIDENCE OF MEETING STANDARD IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix) NAEYC 3b |
Little evidence is provided; descriptions are vague.
Captions missing from photos Little or no “mark-up of handbooks”
|
Sufficient evidence is consistently provided with reasonable descriptive detail.
Supportive documentation is consistently included in Appendix.
|
Multiple types of evidence are consistently provided with rich descriptive detail.
Labeling and annotations within evidence highlight key features within evidence and support comparison and analysis. Evidence is provided in all of the sub-areas of the standard. |
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE IN ALL SUB-AREAS
(in narrative and Appendix)
NAEYC 6d |
Provides no summary or interpretation of evidence, or makes only vague statements of relationship between evidence and standards.
Does not discuss differences between program policy and actual program practices in practicum classroom. Does not discuss strengths of program and areas in need of improvement, or does not do so in standards-based way, instead putting interpretations in terms of personal preferences. |
Summarizes the evidence, and interprets it relative to standards. The interpretation of the evidence is clear and explicit, indicating how the standard is or is not being met.
Notes strengths and areas in need of improvement from a standards-based perspective. Discusses both program policy and actual practices in own room.
|
Summarizes the evidence in all of the sub-areas of the standard.
The interpretation of the evidence is clear, explicit, and standards-based. Student distinguishes between evidence that has a major impact on program quality from minor flaws. Discusses fully how the program polices as implemented in the classroom compare to stated policy. Highlights exemplary practices within the program as well as identifying areas that could use improvement, and makes explicit suggestions for how to implement improvement.
|
(5 x 2)
|
10 |
| PROFESSIONALISM | 0 | ||||
| MEETS DEADLINES for formative review and feedback, and incorporates feedback into subsequent work.
NAEYC 6c |
Materials requested by supervisor not ready for face-to-face or electronic review at the specified times. Unsatisfactory responses to requests for changes and/or resubmissions. | Student has materials ready for review at specified times, and feedback is incorporated into subsequent work. | Student and supervisor were collaborative partners over time, habitually co-reviewing work in progress and finding ways to improve the completeness and depth of analysis in the final product.
|
(5 x 5.5)
|
27.5 |
| PROFESSIONAL QUALITY | Portfolio is not of professional quality – it is disorganized, poorly written, and/or contains frequent errors of grammar or spelling. | Portfolio is generally of professional quality – it has occasional lapses of organization and/or professional tone and/or it has some errors of grammar or spelling. | Portfolio is very professional (organized and few if any errors) and is very well written. | (5 x 5.5)
|
27.5 |
| TOTAL SCORE (out of 192.5) = 100% | 192.5 |
| UNDERSTANDING | EVIDENCE | INTERPRETATION | Professional | Total | |
| Physical
Environment |
5 | 10 | 10 | 27.5 | |
| Family Involvement | 5 | 10 | 10 | 27.5 | |
| Group Size & Ratio | 2.5 | 5 | 5 | ||
| Health & Safety | 5 | 10 | 10 | ||
| Nutrition & Food Service | 5 | 10 | 10 | ||
| Administration | 5 | 10 | 10 | ||
| Total | 27.5 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 192.5 |
| Possible | 27.5 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 192.5 |
| Percentage to enter in Blackboard | |||||
| Points in Blackboard
See rubrics below |
500 possible x total percentage earned= |
