For this summative assessment, you will prepare a comprehensive case study analysis that reflects on an ethical dilemma you have encountered during their cli

C2: Summative Assessment Rubric

Criteria Ratings

Writing Mechanics

Sources

APA formatting

MASTERY Only minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctation errors present (1-2 errors). The overall sentence structure is well developed throughout, and paragraphs are fully developed with consistent style and clear communication.

PROFICIENT Minor spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks minor elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are consistently developed. (3-4 errors)

DEVELOPING Minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are not consistently developed. (5- 7 errors)

EMERGING Multiple spelling grammar and/or punctuation errors present and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are minimally developed. (more than 7-9 errors)

NOT EVIDENT Significant spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are poorly developed. (10 or more errors

MASTERY The use of sources was consistent throughout the document in all areas to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.

PROFICIENT In most areas, sources were consistently used throughout the submission to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.

DEVELOPING Sources were occasionally used to support some claims and/or statements in the artifact, but statements were not consistently supported with sources throughout.

EMERGING Minimal usage of sources present in the artifact, and/or the overall communication lacked appropriate research support.

NOT EVIDENT Sources were not used to support major statements and/or claims, where needed in the artifact

MASTERY Citations, references, and formatting

PROFICIENT Citations, references, and formatting

DEVELOPING APA style is demonstrated with some consistency,

EMERGING Formatting, citations, and/or references,

NOT EVIDENT Formatting, citations, and references

Criteria Ratings

Ethical Implications

Analysis of model/theory in the case study.

follow APA style guide, with only one or two minor errors.

follow APA style guide, with more than 2 errors, but they are minor.

but the majority of the citation, references, and/or formatting is not correct.

are attempted, but do not follow APA style guidelines consistently.

are not included, or do not follow appropriate APA style guide.

MASTERY Ethical implications are addressed from a study / participant view point and a study findings / community viewpoint with detailed description of the ethical implication and the outcome of those implications.

PROFICIENT Ethical implications information was addressed with good information for the study.

DEVELOPING Ethical implications information was addressed, but wasn’t always aligned with the study, participants, or community.

EMERGING Brief mention of ethical implications, but is not tied to the topic of the study.

NOT EVIDENT Limited or no ethical implications provided.

MASTERY Submission includes a detailed communication of the learning theory, specific aspects from the theory used to support student learning in the scenario, and a strong rationale included in the comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be

PROFICIENT Submission includes a clear description of the learning theory, aspects from the theory used to support student learning in the scenario, and a comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be used to

DEVELOPING Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and a comparison with aspects from another learning theory that could also be used in a similar setting.

EMERGING Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and a comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be used in a similar setting, but the rationale for one or both learning theories is not clear.

NOT EVIDENT Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and/or another theory that could be used in a similar setting, but rationale for either of the learning theories is not clear.

Criteria Ratings

Application

used to achieve a similar goal.

achieve a similar goal.

MASTERY The reflective paper effectively explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper effectively highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.

PROFICIENT The reflective paper explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.

DEVELOPING The reflective paper somewhat explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper somewhat highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.

EMERGING The reflective paper minimally explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper minimally highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.

NOT EVIDENT The reflective paper does not explain the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper excludes highlights on the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.