PSC Standards APA formatting is not APA format has 1-3 style errors. APA format. Includes the evident. The standards Is missing 1-2 appropriate Georgia appropriate Georgia PSC/ISTE addressed are not the PSC/ISTE Instructional Instructional Georgia PSC/ISTE Technology/Coaching Standards Technology/Coaching Standards Instructional that are exemplified by this that are exemplified by this Technology/Coaching proposal. proposal. Standards; OR no standards are addressed. Project The project description is The narrative articulates the The model APA narrative Description poorly planned out. Readers project but readers are unclear as articulates the project such that the cannot envision how to how each objective will be reader can envision how the objectives will be achieved, achieved; OR an unrealistic objectives will be achieved. A what resources will be used, timeline is provided; OR the realistic timeline table is provided. or the timeline planned. resources needed and responsible The resources needed and parties are not and/or poorly responsible parties are realistic described. and clearly described. Evaluation Plan The evaluation plan does not The evaluation plan provides a APA narrative. Model evaluation show a relationship between narrative that attempts to articulate plan provides a narrative that the evaluation the relationship between the clearly articulates the relationship instruments/methods and the evaluation methods and the between the evaluation methods objectives of the project. objectives of the project, but and the objectives of the project. questions remain. The timeline is The timeline table is clear and unrealistic. Samples of evaluation realistic. Samples of evaluation instruments or questions are not instruments or questions are included. included and well-developed. References 3 or more references are APA formatting has 1-3 errors; APA formatting is correct; all missing; OR the formatting extra references are listed within references listed are cited within does not appear to be APA. the proposal; 1-2 references are the proposal; no references are missing; OR 1-2 references are not missing; AND all references are considered reliable and trusted by considered reliable and trusted by the field. the field. Comments: Approved: All “Satisfactory” Current Pending Revision: All at or above Capstone “Below Satisfactory” Status and Comments Pending Rewrite: One or more at “Unsatisfactory”
PSC Standards APA formatting is not evident. The standards addressed are not the Georgia PSC/ISTE Instructional Technology/Coaching Standards; OR no standards are addressed. APA format has 1-3 style errors. Is missing 1-2 appropriate Georgia PSC/ISTE Instructional Technology/Coaching Standards that are exemplified by this proposal. APA format. Includes the appropriate Georgia PSC/ISTE Instructional Technology/Coaching Standards that are exemplified by this proposal. Project Description The project description is poorly planned out. Readers cannot envision how objectives will be achieved, what resources will be used, or the timeline planned. The narrative articulates the project but readers are unclear as to how each objective will be achieved; OR an unrealistic timeline is provided; OR the resources needed and responsible parties are not and/or poorly described. The model APA narrative articulates the project such that the reader can envision how the objectives will be achieved. A realistic timeline table is provided. The resources needed and responsible parties are realistic and clearly described. Evaluation Plan The evaluation plan does not show a relationship between the evaluation instruments/methods and the objectives of the project. The evaluation plan provides a narrative that attempts to articulate the relationship between the evaluation methods and the objectives of the project, but questions remain. The timeline is unrealistic. Samples of evaluation instruments or questions are not included. APA narrative. Model evaluation plan provides a narrative that clearly articulates the relationship between the evaluation methods and the objectives of the project. The timeline table is clear and realistic. Samples of evaluation instruments or questions are included and well-developed. References 3 or more references are missing; OR the formatting does not appear to be APA. APA formatting has 1-3 errors; extra references are listed within the proposal; 1-2 references are missing; OR 1-2 references are not considered reliable and trusted by the field. APA formatting is correct; all references listed are cited within the proposal; no references are missing; AND all references are considered reliable and trusted by the field. Current Capstone Status and Comments Comments: Approved: All “Satisfactory” Pending Revision: All at or above “Below Satisfactory” Pending Rewrite: One or more at “Unsatisfactory”
Portfolio_Handbook_28_PSC_standards_has_8500_in_it_and_no_eval_plan.docx