Professionalism as an Educator

profilemdavis_1
Rubric_Print_Format25.xlsx

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
ELM-250 ELM-250-O500 Professionalism as an Educator 40.0
Criteria Percentage No Submission (0.00%) Insufficient (65.00%) Approaching (75.00%) Acceptable (85.00%) Target (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Criteria 100.0%
Students 15.0% Not addressed. Descriptions of professional behavior are poor and give a weak explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students. Descriptions of professional behavior are sufficient and give a basic explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students. Descriptions of professional behavior are clear and give a descriptive explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students. Descriptions of professional behavior are thorough and give an in-depth explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students.
Students' Families 15.0% Not addressed. Descriptions of professional behavior are underdeveloped and give a vague explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students' families. Descriptions of professional behavior are effective and give a broad explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students' families. Descriptions of professional behavior are sound and give a effective explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students' families. Descriptions of professional behavior are comprehensive and give a substantial explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with students' families.
Coworkers 15.0% Not addressed. Descriptions of professional behavior are insufficient and give a minimal explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with coworkers. Descriptions of professional behavior demonstrate basic competence and give a moderate explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with coworkers. Descriptions of professional behavior are used well and give a solid explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with coworkers. Descriptions of professional behavior are quality and give a specific explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with coworkers.
Administrators 15.0% Not addressed. Descriptions of professional behavior are ineffective and give an inadequate explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with administrators. Descriptions of professional behavior sufficient and give a basic explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with administrators. Descriptions of professional behavior are considerable and give a relevant explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with administrators. Descriptions of professional behavior are substantial and give an insightful explanation of how to behave professionally for positive, collaborative relationships with administrators.
Reflection 15.0% Not addressed. Reflection minimally summarizes personal professionalism as an educator and ability to display the behaviors described in the table. Evidence of reflection is weak. Reflection sufficiently summarizes personal professionalism as an educator and ability to display the behaviors described in the table. Evidence of reflection is moderate. Reflection clearly summarizes personal professionalism as an educator and ability to display the behaviors described in the table. Evidence of reflection is suitable. Reflection thoroughly summarizes personal professionalism as an educator and ability to display the behaviors described in the table. Evidence of reflection is extensive.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 15.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 10.0% Not addressed. Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors are present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage 100%