References Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d.a). [Interactive media]. Baltimore, MD: Author. Laureate Education. 2016. Virtual field experience analysis sheet document. Retrieved from: Nieto, S. (Ed.). (2014). Why we teach now. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Owen, S. M. (2015). Teacher professional learning communities in innovative contexts: ‘ah hah Professional Development moments’, ‘passion’ and ‘making a difference’ for student learning. In Education, 41(1), 57-74. doi:10.1080/19415257.2013.869504 Walden University M.S. in Education Program Formative Evaluative Criteria for Applications and Reflective Essays A: Target B: F: Unacceptable C: Developing (Exemplary Work) (Work Submitted but Quality of (Minimal Work) Level) Unacceptable) Work (Value: 0.4 (Value: 0.2 point Submitted point possible (Value: 0.3 point 0.1 point possible per box) per box) possible per box) possible per box) Candidate Candidate Candidate Candidate Candidate addresses 100% addresses 90% completed 80% or completes less than adheres to of the ofthe more of the 80% of the assignment requirements in requirements in requirements in requirements in the expectation the the assignment’s assignment’s by meeting criteria. criteria. the assigned (0.4 point) (0.3 point) (0.2 point) (0.1 point) criteria. Degree to 100% of 90% of information which the information presented is candidate presentedis presents clearly reliable
References Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d.a). [Interactive media]. Baltimore, MD: Author. Laureate Education. 2016. Virtual field experience analysis sheet document. Retrieved from: Nieto, S. (Ed.). (2014). Why we teach now. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Owen, S. M. (2015). Teacher professional learning communities in innovative contexts: ‘ah hah moments’, ‘passion’ and ‘making a difference’ for student learning. Professional Development In Education, 41(1), 57-74. doi:10.1080/19415257.2013.869504 Walden University M.S. in Education Program Formative Evaluative Criteria for Applications and Reflective Essays Quality of Work Submitted A: Target (Exemplary Work) (Value: 0.4 point possible per box) B: Level) (Value: 0.3 point possible per box) C: Developing (Minimal Work) (Value: 0.2 point possible per box) F: Unacceptable (Work Submitted but Unacceptable) 0.1 point possible per box) Candidate adheres to assignment expectation by meeting the assigned criteria. Degree to which the candidate presents Candidate addresses 100% of the requirements in the (0.4 point) Candidate addresses 90% ofthe requirements in (0.3 point) Candidate completed 80% or more of the requirements in the assignment’s criteria. (0.2 point) Candidate completes less than 80% of the requirements in the assignment’s criteria. (0.1 point) 100% of information presented is clearly reliable 90% of information presentedis
virtual_field_experience_assignment.docx