Investigate the purpose and requirements of the Investing in Innovation Fund—Development Grants. Identify a school district or specific school in your community that may benefit from this initiative.Write an APA manuscript in which you do the following:Give the project title on the title page and in the headings.In your introduction, review the purpose of the Investing in Innovation Fund and who it is intended to serve.Describe the innovation, and explain why it is needed.Describe the students to be served.State the instructional goals (what learners as a group will learn).State the measurable learning outcomes.Describe any special project features, such as the use of technology.Describe official and other partners and what their roles will be.This assignment is a part of institutional effectiveness, program quality, and graduate candidate programmatic outcome mastery measurement initiatives. It is a common assignment that is required in every section of EDU660. Your assignment deliverable will be assessed using the grading criteria that align with the program progression and national standard requirements provided here. Your instructor will provide assessment results, including progression feedback, within the gradebook area for this assignment.
aiumed_cassessment_rubricdreyfusmodel_010617.xlsx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
MED OUTCOME
CAEP***
ADV
1. Analyze Research
Findings—to respond
to academic, physical,
social, and cultural
differences in educating A.1.1.
students and
recommend method
modifications based on
research results
REMEDIATION
NBPTS CORE
PROP**
Core 1, A1.2
NOVICE *- 1
COMPETENT *- 2
PROFICIENT* – 3
EXPERT *- 4
Needs help with rules.
Not a thorough
researcher. Cannot
define social, cultural
differences. Needs
strong guidance in
selecting methods. No
logical connections, no
critical thinking.
Essential knowledge of
resources, tactics,
methods. Needs
guidance to complete a
balanced analysis. Can
recommend basic
changes on established
models, processes.
Products need more
explication, elaboration.
Weak use of experiential
knowledge.
Can make research
plans and conduct to
graduate-level
standards. Minor errors
or missing items. Uses
creativity, innovation to
derive problem
resolutions. Strength in
writing for audience,
presentation, with few
minor errors.
Analysis covers whole
scope of academic,
physical, social, cultural
implications. Knows
processes and can adapt
them to situations.
Good data analysis,
strong synthesis.
Recommendations are
intuitive, merging facts
with experience. Strong
sense of confidence.
Good presentation,
writing for audience.
Coach student to work
independently.
Encourage original
thinking. Pull ideas
from student. Student
cites examples,
describes cases.
Student focuses on
context, situations,
distinctions, differences.
Student gets beyond
essentials. More
reading, discussions,
dialectics. Student
defines graduate-level
work. Student focuses
on creativity, flexibility
in problem analysis.
Practice writing out
problem separation,
conclusions.
Student learns to
critique his/her and
others’ planning.
Critical analysis of
situations. Familiarity
with published key
ideas.
Student practices
finding unique sources
of information. Student
practices data collection
from interviews,
personal sources.
Practices connecting
theories with real
examples.
2. Design Educational
Programs—that
effectively address
objectives integrating
A.1.1.
appropriate use of
various instructional
media and technologies
for learning.
REMEDIATION
Needs constant tutorial,
review, processing help.
Unable to conceive or
create objectives
without help and
guidance. Cannot justify
match of technology
with plans. Superficial
knowledge of
technology. Course
Core 3, 4, A1.2
planning largely
directive, norm-based.
Inadequate evaluation.
Student critique of
his/her and others’
designs. Critique of
published programs.
Less reliance on
instructor, more
reliance on self, and
introspection.
Collects and investigates
some needs data and
organizational data.
Discipline-based
thinking, decisionmaking. Uses
descriptive statistics,
data. May miss
important analysis or
fail to be thorough in
matching needs, design.
Some errors in writing
objectives. Not good
theoretical anchors.
Weak justifications.
Aggressively pursues
performance
requirements and
organizational view of
systems. Design plan
justifies based on
organizational needs.
Student-centered.
Emphasis on
cost/benefit analysis,
data. Some evidence of
original thinking
although tends to rely
on book solutions or
prior experience, client
suggestions.
Unique, novel
adaptation of themes,
theories, methods,
media. Targets student
engagement and
describes desired
performance.
Individualized student
needs, learning paths.
Useful, innovative
technology. Integrates
assessment with
instruction. Emphasis
on reinforcement,
remediation. Confident,
accurate, convincing
writing and
presentation. Uses
multiple precedents for
ideas and approaches.
Encourage student
Emphasis on systematic Focus on originality,
research into real
thinking, especially
creativity, use of
organizations, situations knowledge of
unfamiliar methods,
to link theories,
organizational systems. exercises, techniques.
published cases to
Emphasis on difficult
Focus on leadership
reality. Student should analyses, potential
techniques, project
focus on potential
problems in design,
management, budgeting,
problem analysis in
working with other
other discipline specific
design situations. Focus people, leadership of
skills.
on interactions with
design teams. Support
clients, and possible
student self-analysis of
impacts of design work. delivery of training,
education.
Little evidence of
audience, situation
research. Needs
prompting for selection
of content. Poor flow,
content, timing, student
development over
course. Highly
dependent on
3. Develop Educational
instructors for what,
Programs—that use
how to do. Micro
appropriate criteria for
orientation to courses,
selecting curricular
A1.1, A.1.2 Core 2, 4, A1.2
little systematic view.
content, organization of
content, and methods of
curriculum evaluation
Demonstrates use of
methods in different
situations, with
flexibility. Relies more
on teacher, texts,
standard answers than
on original synthesis of
source information,
material. Problems
applying technology and
justifying it. May miss
objectives, or place
incorrect emphasis.
May not integrate new
material well into
existing courses,
curricula.
Development follows
design plan. May lapse
in individualization of
exercises, activities.
Uses student-driven
learning. Aware of
motivation needs. Uses
production values
deliberately. Uses
unique methods
appropriate to audience,
individuals, situation
and topics. Emphasizes
remediation. Integrates
technology
appropriately. Adds
follow-up exercises,
practice activities.
Creativity is evident.
Can handle large or
small projects.
Evidence of multifaceted approaches,
unique, original. Can
work directly with
clients, manage projects
and budgets, resolve
issues in staff and with
client. Good uses of
transition, motivation,
logical flow based on
application of
prerequisites. Crossdisciplinary thinking.
Writes, presents with
ease, authority,
accuracy. Wide range of
media and methods
appropriately used.
Produces and uses both
formative and
summative data/reports
regularly, using
statistical analysis.
REMEDIATION
Student learns to
emphasize audience,
needs, variability,
human dynamics.
Student should reduce
dependence on others,
instructors, for
information, answers.
Focus on deeper
organization, thinking in
work outputs.
Distinguish between
tasks of design and
tasks of development.
Reemphasize key
standards, classical
approaches. Start
building originality into
thinking, based on older
models. Encourage
student to critique
his/her and others’
work and to develop
communications around
the critique. Emphasize
deeper knowledge of
software, network
operations, e-learning.
Emphasize close
alignment of design
plan, development
processes. Focus on
performance objectives,
and student learns to
double-check objectives
against needs data as
guide to development.
Emphasis on potential
problem analysis in
development, timelines
for development, hiring
specialists for
development.
Student should write
original development
plan, focusing on
technology and
methodology for all
venues, teaching
methods, situations.
Emphasis on crossdisciplinary thinking.
Emphasis on curriculum
processes, leadership
skills.
4. Create Plan for
Implementation—of
learning content in
various educational
settings.
Labored, unimaginative,
narrow planning. Often
incomplete thinking.
Needs close coaching,
explanations. Uses
comfortable methods,
disregarding analysis
data. Little or no
consideration for
educator prerequisite
A1.1, A.2.1. Core 2, 3, A1.2 capabilities. Weak
planning for educator
training or specialized
development.
Follows established,
published guides for
implementation. Little
tailoring to situation,
educator, and/or needs
of students. May miss
important logistics
considerations.
Essential plan elements
are derived, but logic,
creative thinking often
missing. Relies on
educator initiative to
make up the difference.
Able to integrate new,
revised courses into an
existing curriculum.
Can plan to implement
entire curriculum. Can
detail accurate
specifications for
technology needs,
networks. Adapts to
special education
circumstances,
audiences. Shows
solutions for special
needs students. Able to
schedule materials,
rooms, educators
effectively. Plans for
contingencies,
emergencies. Able to
train educators and
administrators.
Implement plans based
on situational
considerations.
Detailed budget
structures, timelines,
project plans included.
Planning illustrates
experiential knowledge
as well as textbook
knowledge. Complex
plans are fully
explained, capable of
implementation.
Audience-centered,
effective
communication.
REMEDIATION
5. Evaluate Programs
Formative and
Summative—opportunities and challenges
involved in
organizational
A1.1, A.2.2.
development and
delivery of learning
programs and using
formative and
summative instruments.
Core 4, A1.2
Student reviews
planning process for
course and curriculum
implementation.
Student should build a
checklist for his own
situation. Student
expands reading, study
outside of localized
school materials.
Student discusses this
task with more
experienced
professionals, to gain
breadth of experience.
Focus on going beyond
standardized methods,
and emphasize data
from the situation,
including affective as
well as cognitive data.
Student investigates
other orgs to see how
standards are
interpreted. Student
reviews most likely
setting options,
including equipment,
people, technology.
Minimum coverage for
evaluation. No
documentation of
validity or reliability or
inter-rater reliability.
Eval relies on shortanswer, multiple choice.
Eval planning must be
prompted by instructor.
Evaluator not good at
test design. Little data
reporting.
Has basic knowledge of
procedures, processes.
Can collect and interpret
correct data effectively.
Plans include detailed
data validation and
reporting. Little
emphasis on evaluating
subjective data in
affective domain. Eval
not systematically
carried out.
Student reviews indepth current curricula
from various sites,
practicing ways to
integrate new material,
approaches. Focus on
study of change
management in practice,
and how to initiate,
guide it. Develop
practical notes,
procedures based on
potential-problem
analysis of
implementation.
Practice converting
teacher-led to studentled learning.
Close connection
between curricular
outcomes and eval
planning. Good
formative and
summative planning,
systems. Good
remediation for
students. Uses multiple
assessments, methods.
Able to adjust
assessment to given
situations.
Practice using student
input and contributions
to develop studentcentered instruction.
Review theories of
learning, and show
implementation in
practice. Interview
experienced
practitioners about
implementation
methods, processes, and
obstacles.
Plans are aligned with
organizational goals,
outcomes, needs. Uses
imaginative methods to
plan, carry out
evaluation. Emphasis
on demonstration of
capability. Illustrates
valid, reliable, and
systematic approach
tailored to situation.
REMEDIATION
6. Evaluate Programs
Leadership and
Management—evaluate educational
situations and problems A1.1., A2.2
in order to develop and
substantiate solutions
using leadership and
management strategies.
Core 5, A1.2
Practice integration of
assessment into classes
both online and inperson. Practice
development of
assessments for
individuals and small
groups. Practice
personalizing an
assessment to small
opportunity or
challenge.
Work to resolve issues
in evaluation systems.
Validate evaluation
systems and assessment
methods. Write
definitions of rationale
for data-gathering
instruments. Practice
use of writing terminal
performance objectives
and associated
assessments.
Establish statistical data
and validity/reliability
proofs for selected
assessments, questions.
Create a rubric that is
generic for a discipline.
Create a rubric that
includes affective
domain capabilities.
Test for affective
domain competency.
Diagram and describe
ways in which
assessments are
weighted and balanced
for a course and
curriculum. Evaluate
assignment of course
hours to a course, based
on content. Participate
in dialectic on value of
short-answer vs.
performance-based
assessments.
Limited ability to
evaluate educational
situations. Little
knowledge of
educational org
structures, typical
systems. Narrow
interpretation of
findings. Solutions
more theoretical than
practical. Hesitant,
questioning. No
application of
management strategies
or leadership
approaches. Heavy
reliance on past
practice.
Can evaluate familiar
situations with
confidence. Analysis
considers most factors.
Follows narrow path to
solutions, relying on
history rather than
situation. Looks for too
quick results. Uses
problem-solving
processes, but
systematically at times.
Solutions often
anchored in popular
management clichés,
standard approaches.
Evaluates most
situations correctly,
wide scope of concern
across systems.
Thorough detail,
collecting evidence for
situations. Original
thinking with clearly
stated arguments.
Leader in touch with the
organization. Uses
personal leader traits
with subordinates.
Firm grasp of
organizational picture.
Uses wide-ranging data
collection methods with
experiential knowledge.
Involves others in
problem-solving,
decision-making. Clear
presentation of
problems,
opportunities, potential
solutions. Strong
evidence of selfreflection regarding
personal leadership
traits.
REMEDIATION
7. Discipline-Related
Communication
Skills—demonstrate
advanced, disciplineappropriate
communication skills in
written and
presentation formats.
A1.1, A1.2
Core 2, A1.2
Collect evidence from
situations that
demonstrates effective
and ineffective
management.
Participate in dialectic
on the various
approaches to
leadership. Discuss the
value of role of manager
or supervisor in
education. Develop
wide sources for
information and data on
education leadership.
Practice various
scenarios having to do
with need for
leadership. Practice
problem-solving,
problem avoidance,
conflict resolution.
Practice leadership in
volunteer groups.
Show how local
situations can influence
organizational behavior,
attitudes. Study impact
of motivation on
leadership. Explain
ways to lead audience
to self-directed
approaches. Dialectic
on role of audience in
formal learning process.
Outline an
organization’s functions,
areas of responsibility,
and maps systems
within the organization.
Dialectic on roles of
teacher-leader,
department chair,
administrator, principal
and relative tasks for
each. Discussion of
problems, likely
problems, potential
problems and solutionfinding in ed leadership.
Poor vocabulary, syntax
often evident. Weak or
disjointed expression of
ideas. Difficult to follow
logic. Incomplete
research, reliance on
popular assertions.
Poor ability to present
ideas, research,
conclusions. Audience
not considered. Heavily
flawed formatting.
Writing, presentations
closely aligned with
requirements. Work is
at graduate level, formal
standard English.
Formatting without
major error. Occasional
lapses in logic,
argument. Remains
mechanical, shallow in
analysis, treatment of
topics.
Clear writing and
presentation. Good
definition of theses, and
development of ideas in
logical order. Good use
of imagination, critical
thinking in analysis and
presentation. Includes
data to support ideas as
an integral part of work.
Assignment
requirements met.
Strong attempt to
address, engage
audience. Formatting
requirements met.
Novel approaches to
use of media. Products
are tailored to topics,
audience, assignments.
Problem-solving
evident, and creative
thinking. Unique
resources, including
examples from
interviews.
Organizational, strategic
systemic view of topics.
Formatting
requirements met.
REMEDIATION
Intense writing
exercises, based on real
or realistic documents
and writing tasks.
Review of standard
English. Review of parts
of a sentence. Review of
presentation skills
methods. Practice using
required formatting.
Critique of college-level
compositions, articles,
book sections. Work on
broader vocabulary.
Critique written
exercises for logic, flow.
Critique arguments
from various sources for
sense, logic, critical
thinking. Edit for
formatting.
Practice giving
presentations with and
without media. Practice
presenting with a live
audience, with a video
camera. Begin with
creating hypotheses and
develop brief but clear
arguments. Begin and
take part in a dialectic
on a key theoretical
topic in the field.
Ask for and reply to
counter-arguments to
your own position
papers. Practice
positive critique of
supervisors, managers.
Practice using media
without prior
preparation. Defend use
of specific media for
specific applications.
Defend significance of
communication skills in
all disciplines.
* Adapted Dreyfus
Model of Skill
Acquisition
** National Board of
Professional Teaching
Standards
Core 1 – Educators are committed to students and their learning.
Core 2 – Educators know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
Core 3 – Educators are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
Core 4 – Educators think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
Core 5 – Educators are members of learning communities.
***CAEP Advanced
Standards A1 and A2
A1.1- Candidates for advanced preparation demonstrate their proficiencies to understand and apply knowledge and skills appropriate to th
A1.2- Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowle
A2.1- Partners co-construct mutually beneficial P-12 school and community arrangements, including technology-based collaborations, for
A2.2- The provider works with partners to design varied and developmental clinical settings that allow opportunities for candidates to pra
DO NOT USE 5
The MED/CAEP Rubic
is based on a 4 point
even ranking
methodology. Do not
use the number 5
when ranking MED
student progression.
This column is
reserved for other AIU
programs and future
MED data collection.
NOT
APPLICABLE
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
For use if
student didn’t
complete the
assignment,
or withdrew
from the
course.
ropriate to their professional field of specialization so that learning and development opportunities for all P-12 are enhanced, through: applications of data literacy; use of
dates to practice applications of content knowledge and skills that the courses and other experiences of the advanced preparation emphasize. The opportunities lead to a
teracy; use of research and understanding of qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed methods research methodologies; employment of data analysis and evidence to devel
ties lead to appropriate culminating experiences in which candidates demonstrate proficiencies through problem-based tasks or research that are characteristic of their
d evidence to develop supportive school environments; leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrat
achers, administrators, community organizations, and parents; supporting appropriate applications of technology for their field of specializations; and application of prof
application of professional dispositions, laws and policies, codes of ethics and professional standards appropriate to their field of specialization.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Recent Comments