Assignment # 1 – In this assignment, you will examine Response to Intervention (RTI) and Evidence-Based Practices (EBP) and examine at least 3 Evidence-Based Practices that can be used in RTI settings. RTI settings allow for a lot of room related to program delivery, so you should be able to examine how RTI and EBP are connected in real-life classrooms. You should also examine the role of evidence-based practices and the criteria that you used to determine if these interventions were adequately vetted classroom practices. This paper is not to be lengthy – a maximum of 5 pages (not including references; an abstract is not needed). The assignment rubric will be used for this assignment, but feedback will be in comments about your submission. This paper should reflect the professional literature, not your opinion.
General Rubric For All Assignments
This rubric will be used in evaluating the quality of your discussion contributions and written assignments. Numeric values are not assigned to the categories as they change according to the value of the assignment. I want to see well thought out and referenced ideas, not opinion based on experience. Experience is a wonderful thing, but in this course we will stick to researched facts from your text and peer-reviewed articles.
|
|
Criteria Ratings |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grasp of readings
|
Excellent Writing and oral expression represents researched perspective, evidence and conclusions accurately, fairly, and eloquently; Demonstrates a firm understanding of the implications of researched arguments. |
Good Writing and oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions accurately but with little detail. |
Developing Writing and oral presentation mostly represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions though not clearly and/or there are minor inaccuracies. Some opinion. |
Needs Improvement Writing and/or poor oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and/or conclusions. Mostly opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Critical analysis |
Excellent Presents a clear, focused, and compelling position. Recognizes and presents the complexity of the issue. |
Good Position/opinions articulated well but needs more support and refining. |
Developing Analysis and thought are limited. Lacks support from research. Some opinion. |
Needs Improvement Vague and general comments. Mostly opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evidence |
Excellent Evidence is cited, detailed, and well-chosen. Evidence is clearly articulated. |
Good Evidence is well chosen but not well articulated, is not particularly presented and not clearly substantiated. |
Developing Evidence is weak and lacking in detail. Some opinion. |
Needs Improvement Evidence does not support ideas. Mostly opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Organization & Clarity |
Excellent Thoughts flow logically with good transitions, including supported research. |
Good Thoughts are mostly well-structured and mostly presented clearly. |
Developing Jumps from one idea to another without structure, transitions or connections.
|
Needs Improvement Thoughts are not presented logically. Mostly opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mechanics |
Excellent When applicable, thoughts/paper are appropriately organized using APA format throughout. There are no incomplete or run on sentences. No spelling or grammar issues. |
Good Thoughts/paper is appropriately organized with only minor grammatical issues. |
Developing There are many formatting, spelling, word usage and grammar issues. |
Needs Improvement Unacceptable. There are incomplete and/or run-on sentence(s). Thoughts are characterized by spelling and grammar errors. |
