5.0 %Mechanics of Writing No submission. Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. Submission is nearly/completely free of mechanical errors. 5.0 %Title and Research Citations Sources No submission. Contains no title slide, no References section, and no correctly cited references within the body of the presentation. Title slide has minor errors. References section includes sources, but they are not cited consistently or correctly. Citations are included within the body of the presentation, but with some errors. Title slide has minor errors. References section includes sources, but not consistently cited correctly. References included within the body of the presentation, but with some citation errors. Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources. References within the body of the presentation are included and correctly cited.

5.0 %Layout No submission. 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 and small point size of fonts, inappropriate contrasting colors, poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting. No notes that script the presentation are included. The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy-to-read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. Minimal notes are present to script the presentation. The layout background and text complement each other and enables the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy-to-read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. Notes are present to script and facilitate the presentation.

35.0 %Professional Development: Team Teaching No submission. Presentation fails to include descriptions of team teaching models or benefits and drawbacks of each. Descriptions for additional team teaching strategies are not provided. Presentation includes inadequate descriptions of team teaching models and inappropriately includes benefits and drawbacks of each. Incomplete descriptions for additional team teaching strategies are provided and are inappropriate for modifications in an inclusive setting. Presentation includes adequate descriptions of team teaching models and appropriately includes benefits and drawbacks of each. Descriptions for additional team teaching strategies are provided and are appropriate for modifications in an inclusive setting. Presentation includes comprehensive descriptions of team teaching models and appropriately includes benefits and drawbacks of each. Complete descriptions for additional team teaching strategies are provided and are appropriate for modifications in an inclusive setting.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. T1-NYC_IEP_Template_Blank.doc T1-IEP_Template_Bank Assignment 2 Rubric: Professional Development: IEPs, Inclusion, and Team Teaching 1 No Evidence 0.00% 2 Nominal Evidence 69.00% 3 Unacceptable Evidence 74.00% 4 Acceptable Evidence 87.00% 5 Target Evidence 100.00% 100.0 %Criteria 20.0 %Professional Development: IEPs No submission. Presentation fails to provide synopses of IEP sections. Presentation includes inadequate synopses of IEP sections. Presentation includes adequate synopses of IEP sections. Presentation includes thorough and clear synopses of IEP sections. 30.0 %Professional Development: Inclusion No submission. Presentation fails to include a description of an inclusion classroom setting or rationalization of appropriately and inappropriately placed special education students.

45.0 %Application of Conclusions to Practice [InTASC: 7, 9; CEC 5, 6, 7] No submission. Responses on applying conclusions to practice is not related to assignment or not submitted. Responses on applying conclusions to practice are unclear or under-developed. Application of conclusions drawn reflects development as a professional. Application of conclusions drawn reflects development as a professional with an awareness of the needs of students, parents, and community. 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) No submission. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. 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.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Assignment 1 Rubrics: Field Experience A: Planning for Instruction 1 No Evidence 0.00% 2 Nominal Evidence 69.00% 3 Unacceptable Evidence 74.00% 4 Acceptable Evidence 87.00% 5 Target Evidence 100.00% 100.0 %CRITERIA 50.0 %Reflections on Planning for Instruction [InTASC: 7; CEC 5, 7] No submission. Reflections are not related to the assignment or not submitted. Reflection does not integrate and/or apply knowledge of students, and/or learning theory, and/or subject matter content, and/or connections among concepts and/or content areas. Reflection integrates knowledge of students, learning theory, subject matter content, and connections among concepts and content areas. Thoroughly reflects on planning for instruction that integrates and applies knowledge of students, learning theory, subject matter content, and connections among concepts and content areas.