Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 29 views

    Rubric in Scoring Student Teaching Portfolio: First Dimension: VISUAL APPEAL (20%)

    Uploaded by

    Madona T. Villanueva
    This document provides a rubric for evaluating student teaching portfolios with four dimensions: visual appeal, organization, content, and reflection. Each dimension contains several indicators that are assessed on a 5-point scale. Scores for each dimension are converted to an equivalent percentage rating. Dimension ratings are multiplied by their assigned weights, then summed to calculate an overall portfolio rating. Evaluators use this rubric by checking indicators, assigning scores for each dimension, and performing the specified grade computations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rubric in Scoring Student Teaching Portfolio: First Dimension: VISUAL APPEAL (20%)

    Uploaded by

    Madona T. Villanueva
    29 views3 pages
    This document provides a rubric for evaluating student teaching portfolios with four dimensions: visual appeal, organization, content, and reflection. Each dimension contains several indicators that are assessed on a 5-point scale. Scores for each dimension are converted to an equivalent percentage rating. Dimension ratings are multiplied by their assigned weights, then summed to calculate an overall portfolio rating. Evaluators use this rubric by checking indicators, assigning scores for each dimension, and performing the specified grade computations.

    Original Description:

    Rubric in practice teaching

    Original Title

    RUBRIC-IN-SCORING-STUDENT-TEACHING-PORTFOLIO

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a rubric for evaluating student teaching portfolios with four dimensions: visual appeal, organization, content, and reflection. Each dimension contains several indicators that are assessed on a 5-point scale. Scores for each dimension are converted to an equivalent percentage rating. Dimension ratings are multiplied by their assigned weights, then summed to calculate an overall portfolio rating. Evaluators use this rubric by checking indicators, assigning scores for each dimension, and performing the specified grade computations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    29 views3 pages

    Rubric in Scoring Student Teaching Portfolio: First Dimension: VISUAL APPEAL (20%)

    Uploaded by

    Madona T. Villanueva
    This document provides a rubric for evaluating student teaching portfolios with four dimensions: visual appeal, organization, content, and reflection. Each dimension contains several indicators that are assessed on a 5-point scale. Scores for each dimension are converted to an equivalent percentage rating. Dimension ratings are multiplied by their assigned weights, then summed to calculate an overall portfolio rating. Evaluators use this rubric by checking indicators, assigning scores for each dimension, and performing the specified grade computations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    RUBRIC IN SCORING STUDENT TEACHING PORTFOLIO

    Note to the Evaluator: Please check (/) the indicators you observed in the first column, if not observed,
    put a cross (x) mark. Then write on the evaluator’s column the corresponding score based on the
    descriptions given.
    There are generally five (5) levels describing performance in each of the dimensions, namely: 5-exceeds
    expectations; 4-meets expectations; 3-in progress; 2-novice; 1-poor.
    First Dimension: VISUAL APPEAL (20%)
    In this dimension, students are expected to show creativity and resourcefulness in developing their portfolios.
    Present/ Indicators Performance Level Score
    Absent
    ( )  The cover is durable and is expected to last long for the future 5-satisfies all the
    reference of the student-owner of the portfolio. indicators
    ( )  The layout of the portfolio shows: 4-fails to satisfy 1 of
    a. Simplicity the indicators
    ( ) b. Neatness 3-fails to satisfy 2 of
    ( ) c. Enthusiasm the indicators
    ( ) d. creativity (i.e., the output is done uniquely and with style) 2-fails to satisfy 3 of
    ( ) e. resourcefulness (i.e., recycled materials) the indicators
    ( )  Others: 1-fails to satisfy more
    than 4 of the indicators

    Second Dimension: ORGANIZATION (20%)

    Present/ Indicators Performance Level Score


    Absent
    ( )  The entries are arranged in order (i.e., entries flow from 5-satisfies all or 10
    introduction, to the body, to concluding words of the portfolio indicators
    owner)
    ( )  The student used color/symbol code which guides the readers 4-fails to satisfy only
    make sense of the content. 2-3 of the indicators
    ( )  There is a table of contents 3-fails to satisfy 4-5 of
    ( )  All the pages contain page numbers the indicators
    ( )  The entries are all legible 2-fails to satisfy 5-6 of
    ( )  Over-all, the portfolio is well organized and has a clear focus. the indicators
    ( )  All entries manifest correct use of the English language 1-fails to satisfy more
    a. Free from grammatical flaws than 6 of the indicators
    ( ) b. Correct choice of words
    ( ) c. Shows unity and coherence of thoughts and ideas
    d. Utilizes transitional devices to shift from one line of thought
    to another
    ( ) e. Shows precision and conciseness, avoids hanging and
    lengthy sentences
    ( )  Others:

    Third Dimension: CONTENT (35%)

    Present/ Indicators Performance Level Score


    Absent
    ( )  All the basic, pre-agreed contents and contained in the portfolio. 5-satisfies all the
    indicators
    ( )  The introduction contains a statement of purpose 4-fails to satisfy 1 of
    the indicators
    ( )  Activities are evidenced/supported by pictures, certificates, 3-fails to satisfy 2 of
    among others, (if necessary) the indicators
    ( )  The entries are varied and capture the entirety of students’ 2-fails to satisfy 3 of
    teaching experiences the indicators
    ( )  All entries are completed and comprehensive. 1-fails to satisfy more
    than 3 of the indicators
    ( )  The entries reflect student teacher’s use of resources and
    materials
    ( )  Others:
    Fourth Dimension: (25%)
    Present/ Indicators Performance Level Score
    Absent
    ( )  Display evidences of self-assessment 5-satisfies all the
    indicators
    ( )  The entries are futuristic (i.e., the student indicates the areas where 4-fails to satisfy 1 of
    s/he can still improve on the basis of past experiences) the indicators
    ( )  Entries identified the competencies where the student finds 3-fails to satisfy 2 of
    him/herself strong at; and the areas where s/he needs improvement the indicators
    ( )  The entries are scholarly (i.e., reflections are anchored on sound 2-fails to satisfy 3 of
    theoretical constructs/bases which guide the student’s teaching the indicators
    behavior and total performance).
    ( )  The reflection shows students’ depth of understanding of his/her 1-fails to satisfy more
    duties/responsibilities and experiences as a student teacher. than 3 of the indicators
    ( )  The reflection provides evidence/s of enthusiasm, creativity,
    extensive investigation and analysis of information.
    Key strength:

    Key Areas of Improvement:

    Scoring Procedure: Below are the steps in grading the portfolio using this rubric.
    1. In evaluating students’ portfolio against a set of criteria articulated in this rubric, the evaluator is
    expected to be very objective by going through each item in every dimension and identified if the
    said items are clearly observed.
    2. Determine the grade for each dimension, count the number of items with X mark and identify the
    performance level corresponding to the score. Indicate in the matrix below the corresponding
    scores of each dimension. Take note that the highest score is 5 while the lowest score is 1.
    Transmute the dimension score by referring to the table below in order to determine the
    equivalent rating.

    Rubric Score Equivalent Rating


    (in percent)
    5-exceeds expectations 95
    4-meets expectations 85
    3-in progress 75
    2-novice 65
    1-poor 55

    3. Take note that there is a corresponding percentage for every dimension. Multiple the percentage
    rating score by weight dimension. Add all the weighted ratings to get the overall rating.

    Dimension Grade Computation


    Weight Raw Score Equivalent rating Weighted rating
    (in %) (in %)
    1.Visual appeal .20
    2.Organization .20
    3.Content .35
    4.Reflection .25
    TOTAL 1.00
    Rated by: _____________________ ___________________

    Name and Signature of Evaluator Date

    You might also like