2045.4.3 : Advancing Instructional Practices
The graduate advances the quality and effectiveness of academic and non-academic instructional practices, resources, technologies, and services to support equitable access to learning for each student.
2045.4.4 : Advancing Assessment Practices
The graduate uses data from culturally responsive and accessible formative and summative assessments to improve instruction and student learning and well-being.
You must complete and pass Tasks 1 and 2 prior to beginning this task.
Part of being an effective school leader is ensuring the programs of study are coherent and prepare students for success. You will lead the school’s efforts in developing, implementing, and evaluating curricula, instructional practices, and assessments.
Over the three tasks for this assessment, you will use eight of the nine steps of curricular evaluation. For this task, Task 3, you will complete steps seven through nine of the curricular evaluation process for programs of study: select and develop tests, select instructional materials, and provide for professional learning. Task 1 covers steps one and two, and Task 2 covers steps four through six.
The documents in the attachments section compose a rich case study similar to the type of information you would have access to as a principal when conducting a curriculum evaluation. You may not need to use each of these attachments in every task, although some attachments are required for this task. However, collectively, the attachments will give you a broad scenario to analyze, and individually, the attachments will help inform thoughtful responses to real-world situations.
As principal of West Oak Cove Elementary School, you have successfully led the curriculum evaluation team through the first five of the nine steps of the curriculum evaluation process for the fourth-grade math curriculum based on the Illinois Common Core State Standards. You have defined the scope of the evaluation, engaged stakeholders, and evaluated and adjusted the curriculum map and curriculum guide excerpt to improve learning. You are now ready to finalize the curriculum evaluation.
Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of a submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. An originality report is provided when you submit your task that can be used as a guide.
You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.
Tasks may not be submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc., unless specified in the task requirements. All other submissions must be file types that are uploaded and submitted as attachments (e.g., .docx, .pdf, .ppt).
A. Evaluate the attached “Summative Assessment” by doing the following:
1. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” in relation to cultural responsiveness, and justify why you classified each as a strength or weakness.
2. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” in relation to accessibility, and justify why you classified each as a strength or weakness.
3. Analyze how well the attached “Summative Assessment” aligns to the attached “Curriculum Map.”
4. Recommend specific steps you would take to help teachers who are using the attached “Summative Assessment” address each of the weaknesses you identified in parts A1–A3.
a. Justify how the steps in part A4 would be effective in addressing the identified weaknesses.
B. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” by doing the following:
1. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” in relation to equity, and justify why you classified each as a strength or weakness.
2. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” in relation to engagement, and justify why you classified each as a strength or weakness.
3. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” in relation to digital literacy, and justify why you classified each as a strength or weakness.
4. Recommend specific steps you would take to help teachers who are using the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” address each of the weaknesses you identified in parts B1–B3.
a. Justify how the steps in part B4 would be effective in addressing the identified weaknesses.
C. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
D. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
File size limit: 200 MB
File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z
|
NOT EVIDENT The submission demonstrates consistently unprofessional or unethical behavior or disposition as outlined in the WGU Teachers College Code of Ethics. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission demonstrates behavior or disposition that conflicts with the professional and ethical standards outlined in the WGU Teachers College Code of Ethics. |
COMPETENT The submission demonstrates behavior and disposition that align with the professional and ethical standards outlined in the WGU Teachers College Code of Ethics. |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission that identifies strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is not provided, or 1 or more of the strengths or weaknesses are inaccurately identified. Or a justification is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification is not relevant to the attached “Summative Assessment” or is not related to cultural responsiveness. Or the justification does not logically explain why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is effective or ineffective in promoting cultural responsiveness. Or the justification is not supported with references to specific information in the attached “Summative Assessment.” |
COMPETENT The justification is relevant to the attached “Summative Assessment” and relates to cultural responsiveness. The justification logically explains why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is effective or ineffective in promoting cultural responsiveness. The justification is supported with references to specific information in the attached “Summative Assessment.” |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission that identifies strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is not provided, or 1 or more of the strengths or weaknesses are inaccurately identified. Or a justification is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification is not relevant to the attached “Summative Assessment” or is not related to accessibility. Or the justification does not logically explain why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is effective or ineffective in promoting accessibility. Or the justification is not supported with references to specific information in the attached “Summative Assessment.” |
COMPETENT The justification is relevant to the attached “Summative Assessment” and relates to accessibility. The justification logically explains why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Summative Assessment” is effective or ineffective in promoting accessibility. The justification is supported with references to specific information in the attached “Summative Assessment.” |
|
NOT EVIDENT An analysis of how well the attached “Summative Assessment” aligns to the attached “Curriculum Map” is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The analysis includes an inaccurate explanation of how well the attached “Summative Assessment” and the attached “Curriculum Map” are aligned or does not include specific, relevant details from the attachment(s) to support the analysis. |
COMPETENT The analysis includes an accurate explanation of how well the attached “Summative Assessment” and the attached “Curriculum Map” are aligned and includes specific, relevant details from the attachment(s) to support the analysis. |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission is not provided, or the submission does not include steps to help teachers who are using the attached “Summative Assessment.” |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission recommends steps that are not plausible or not specific enough to help teachers who are using the attached “Summative Assessment” address each of the weaknesses identified in parts A1–A3. |
COMPETENT The submission recommends plausible, specific steps to help teachers who are using the attached “Summative Assessment” address each of the weaknesses identified in parts A1–A3. |
|
NOT EVIDENT A justification explaining how the steps in part A4 would address any of the weaknesses identified in parts A1–A3 is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification does not explain how the steps in part A4 would effectively address each weakness identified in parts A1–A3, or it does not use relevant examples for support. |
COMPETENT The justification explains how the steps in part A4 would effectively address each weakness identified in parts A1–A3 and uses relevant examples for support. |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission that identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is not provided, or 1 or more of the strengths or weaknesses are inaccurately identified. Or a justification is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification is not relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” or is not related to equity. Or the justification does not logically explain why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting equity. Or the justification is not supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
COMPETENT The justification is relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” and relates to equity. The justification logically explains why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting equity. The justification is supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission that identifies strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is not provided, or 1 or more of the strengths or weaknesses are inaccurately identified. Or a justification is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification is not relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” or is not related to engagement. Or the justification does not logically explain why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting engagement. Or the justification is not supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
COMPETENT The justification is relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” and relates to engagement. The justification logically explains why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting engagement. The justification is supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission that identifies strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is not provided, or 1 or more of the strengths or weaknesses are inaccurately identified. Or a justification is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification is not relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” or is not related to digital literacy. Or the justification does not logically explain why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting digital literacy. Or the justification is not supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
COMPETENT The justification is relevant to the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” and relates to digital literacy. The justification logically explains why each of the identified strengths and weaknesses of the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” is effective or ineffective in promoting digital literacy. The justification is supported with references to specific information in the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
|
NOT EVIDENT A submission is not provided, or the submission does not include steps to help teachers who are using the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division.” |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission recommends steps that are not plausible or specific enough to help teachers who are using the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” address each of the weaknesses identified in parts B1–B3. |
COMPETENT The submission recommends plausible, specific steps to help teachers who are using the attached “Unit of Instruction: Division” address each of the weaknesses identified in parts B1–B3. |
|
NOT EVIDENT A justification explaining how the steps in part B4 would address any of the weaknesses identified in parts B1–B3 is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission does not justify the steps recommended in part B4, or it does not include specific examples of why the recommended steps would be effective. |
COMPETENT The submission justifies the steps recommended in part B4, including specific examples of why the recommended steps would be effective. |
|
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include both in-text citations and a reference list for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list; however, the citations or reference list is incomplete or inaccurate. |
COMPETENT The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are properly quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list that accurately identifies the author, date, title, and source location as available. |
|
NOT EVIDENT Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective. |
COMPETENT Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding. |