METHODOLOGY ASSESSMENT RUBRIC A B C D E F

Topic

Content

Clear, detailed presentation of the topic with full understanding; good arguments; good effective logical structure.

Some features of A and

some features of C.

Clear, simplified presentation; partial understanding of the topic; reasons in support of or against a particular viewpoint given with hesitation. Occasionally guiding questions are needed.

Some features of C and

some features of E

Little understanding of the topic; few arguments; often not completely correct; parts missing.

Very little understanding of the topic; arguments sometimes incorrect; parts missing.

Style

and Language

Appropriate to the content; methodology terms used where necessary.

Language quality is high (both range and accuracy), fluent, and natural.

Terminology sometimes substituted by general expressions. Searching for words; prompts necessary.

Language either limited in range or accuracy; frequent hesitations.

Simple way of explanation with frequent pauses and hesitations; terminology not often used; much prompting necessary; problems with accuracy and fluency.

Lack of terminology; mistakes in grammar or pronunciation.

Applications

Linking theory to practice giving good examples from portfolio. Flexible and creative in professional attitudes. Evidence of reflection.

Efforts to link theory to practice; at times examples from portfolio don’t show full understanding of the theory - either limited in quality or creativity. Limited evidence of reflection.

Can give a limited number of practical examples which don’t demonstrate the principles, or good examples without any rationale. Very limited evidence of reflection.

No or wrong arguments; no justification. No evidence of underpinning theory. Wrong choice of practical activities and examples. Inflexible attitude to facts.

Literature

Titles

Consistently refers to appropriate literature, specifying the title and author. Evidence of critical evaluation of reading. Good bibliography with evidence of reading beyond the required sources.

Refers to a limited number of titles; at times can’t specify the title or the author. Some evidence of critical evaluation of reading. Good bibliography containing required sources.

Refers to only one title; only summarises the content, no critical evaluation. Limited bibliography; not all required sources given.

There is very little or no evidence of reading. Candidate can’t choose the right books or gives titles they have evidently never read.

Evaluation

Critically evaluates wide range of resources and teaching experience. Can apply constructively.

Limited evaluation of different resources and teaching experience. Limited ability to apply constructively.

Limited evaluation of few resources and teaching experience. Can’t think of constructive solutions.

Not able to adapt the content of the books or experience from teaching practice and use them constructively.

Views

Gives own informed views on variety of issues.

Reluctant to express own opinions or give opinions based on improvised thoughts.

Gives hardly any views.

Gives no views.