Developmental Milestones – Rubric

Developmental Milestones 12 points

Criteria Description

Developmental Milestones

5. 5: Target 12 points

Description of developmental milestones, including explanation of why there are

important, is comprehensive and in-depth.

4. 4: Acceptable 10.44 points

Description of developmental milestones, including explanation of why there are

important, is complete and includes relevant supporting details.

3. 3: Approaching 8.88 points

Description of developmental milestones, including explanation of why there are

important, is cursory and is missing key supporting details.

2. 2: Insufficient 8.28 points

Description of developmental milestones, including explanation of why there are

important, is inaccurate and lacks relevant supporting details.

1. 1: No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Typical and Atypical Development 12 points

Criteria Description

Typical and Atypical Development

5. 5: Target 12 points

Description of typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic, physical, social, and

emotional development, including examples of how the milestones may present

differently for student with and without each disability, is insightful and includes

comprehensive examples.

4. 4: Acceptable 10.44 points

Collapse All

Description of typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic, physical, social, and

emotional development, including examples of how the milestones may present

differently for student with and without each disability, is accurate and provides

relevant supporting examples.

3. 3: Approaching 8.88 points

Description of typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic, physical, social, and

emotional development, including examples of how the milestones may present

differently for student with and without each disability, is cursory and supporting

examples lack precision.

2. 2: Insufficient 8.28 points

Description of typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic, physical, social, and

emotional development, including examples of how the milestones may present

differently for student with and without each disability, is incomplete and lacks

relevant supporting examples.

Instructional Strategies 12 points

Criteria Description

Instructional Strategies

5. 5: Target 12 points

Explanation of a specially designed instructional strategy that could be used to

enhance academic achievement is exemplary and demonstrates best practices.

4. 4: Acceptable 10.44 points

Explanation of a specially designed instructional strategy that could be used to

enhance academic achievement is clear and appropriate for students.

3. 3: Approaching 8.88 points

Explanation of a specially designed instructional strategy that could be used to

enhance academic achievement is ambiguous and identifies few connections to

best practices.

2. 2: Insufficient 8.28 points

Explanation of a specially designed instructional strategy that could be used to

enhance academic achievement is erroneous and inappropriate for students.

1. 1: No Submission 0 points

Not addressed

Environmental Strategies 9 points

Criteria Description

Environmental Strategies

5. 5: Target 9 points

Explanation of an environmental strategy to increase success in the classroom

setting is exemplary and demonstrates best practices.

4. 4: Acceptable 7.83 points

Explanation of an environmental strategy to increase success in the classroom

setting is clear and appropriate for students.

3. 3: Approaching 6.66 points

Explanation of an environmental strategy to increase success in the classroom

setting is ambiguous and identifies few connections to best practices.

2. 2: Insufficient 6.21 points

Explanation of an environmental strategy to increase success in the classroom

setting is erroneous and inappropriate for students.

1. 1: No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Title Slide, Slide Notes, and Research Citations 3 points

Criteria Description

Title Slide, Slide Notes, and Research Citations

5. 5: Target 3 points

Title slide and thorough slide notes are present. In-text citations and a reference

slide are complete and correct. Sources are credible. The documentation of cited

sources is free of error.

4. 4: Acceptable 2.61 points

Title slide and slide notes are present. In-text citations have few errors. References

used are reliable and reference slide lists all cited sources with few errors.

3. 3: Approaching 2.22 points

Title slide, and/or slide notes, and/or reference slide are not present. Sources do

not fully support claims, or sources are not all credible. Sources are documented,

although several errors are present.

2. 2: Insufficient 2.07 points

No title slide or slide notes. Reference slide includes errors and/or inconsistently

used citations. Sources are noncredible.

Layout 3 points

Criteria Description

Layout

5. 5: Target 3 points

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with

appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in

length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance

the readability of the text.

4. 4: Acceptable 2.61 points

The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to

be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for

headings and text.

3. 3: Approaching 2.22 points

The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with

large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult

due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background,

overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

2. 2: Insufficient 2.07 points

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and

subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with

long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors.

Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Language Use and Audience Awareness 3 points

Criteria Description

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice,

etc.)

5. 5: Target 3 points

Word choice is distinctive, creative and well-suited to purpose, discipline, scope,

and audience of the presentation.

4. 4: Acceptable 2.61 points

Word choice is reflective of the intended audience, uses a variety of appropriate

vocabulary, and communicates clearly.

3. 3: Approaching 2.22 points

Some distracting inconsistencies or repetitions in word choice are present.

Language is not clearly designed for the targeted audience.

2. 2: Insufficient 2.07 points

Inappropriate word choice is evident. Language is not reflective of the targeted

audience.

Research Citations 3 points

Criteria Description

Research Citations (in-text citations, reference slide, and type of sources)

5. 5: Target 3 points

In-text citations and references slide are complete and error-free. Sources are

credible and appropriate for the submission. The sources strongly support the

submission.

4. 4: Acceptable 2.61 points

In-text citations and references slide have few errors. Sources are credible and

appropriate for the submission.

3. 3: Approaching 2.22 points

Some citations may be missing, or the citations do not support the submission.

References slide may include errors. Sources may not be appropriate for the

submission.

2. 2: Insufficient 2.07 points

Many citations are missing where needed. References slide includes numerous

errors. Sources may not be credible.

Mechanics of Writing 3 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, and grammar)

5. 5: Target 3 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes are virtually free of mechanical errors. Sentence

structures are engaging.

4. 4: Acceptable 2.61 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include some mechanical errors, but they do not

hinder comprehension. Effective sentence structures are used.

3. 3: Approaching 2.22 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include frequent and repetitive mechanical errors

that distract the reader. Sentence structure is lacking.

2. 2: Insufficient 2.07 points

Presentation and speaker’s notes include surface errors that are pervasive enough

that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate sentence construction

is used.

1. 1: No Submission 0 points

Total 60 points