An Evaluation Rubric Ė A Personal Teaching Philosophy Paper

The following rubric will be used by the instructor to grade the final draft of the philosophy of teaching paper.

 

 

Target (10 points)

Acceptable (7 points)

Unacceptable (3 points)

 

Relevant Aspects (25%)

The paper includes all of the relevant aspects (the role of students, teachers, and environment, and instruction that support them) of a philosophy of teaching young children.

The paper includes some of the relevant aspects (all critical areas but one are covered) of a philosophy of teaching young children.

The paper includes only one relevant aspect or makes no attempt to cover these aspects.

 

Evidence of Reflection (25%)

The paper gives evidence of deep personal thought and genuine expression. The ideas are original and well developed, reflecting intense analysis of theories over time.

The paper gives some evidence of deep personal thought. The ideas appear to be a genuine expression of the authorís thinking, and reflect some critical thought. 

The paper lacks evidence of personal thought. The ideas borrow heavily from readings and discussion with some or little evidence that they have been internalized by the author.

 

 

Distinct Voice (20%)

The paper expresses a strong, coherent set of values that permeate the authorís views of teaching. All ideas work together to support the stated values.

The paper expresses a coherent set of values that permeate the authorís views of teaching. While many ideas support the stated values, others are in contradiction or may not seem to flow from values.

The values stated by the author are not strong enough to support ideas; values are implied in ideas and examples, but there is no evidence that these values form the ideas.

 

Examples (15%)

The paper uses specific, concrete examples to explain and illustrate the authorís philosophy. Relevant examples are provided to support all of the main ideas.

The paper uses specific examples to explain and illustrate the authorís philosophy. Relevant examples support some of the main ideas.

The few examples that are given do not well support the philosophy; or examples are not given and the paper relies on generalities. 

Resources (5%)

The paper contains at least three documented resources to support content.

The paper contains one or two documented resources to support content.

There are no documented resources to support content.

 

Organization (5%)

The paper is clear and concise; is well-organized, easy for reader to follow.

The paper is clear, but unnecessarily lengthy; is generally well-organized, but there are a few areas which are not well-organized.

The paper is unclear and/or rambling; may or may not be concise; is poorly organized; difficult to read and understand due to lack of plan.

Mechanics (5%)

There are no errors in grammar or punctuation.

There are no more than five errors in grammar and punctuation.

There are more than five errors in grammar and punctuation.