Description
Benchmark – Foundations of Learning Theories
Assessment Description
Examining the history of learning theory provides context around which educators frame their personal philosophies of teaching and learning. In addition, understanding how teaching, leading, and learning relate to one another is a critical life skill as is the ability to understand the relationship between assessment and accountability; professional success depends on the ability to navigate the interconnected nature of these ideas. In this assignment, you will explore these relationships.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
Instructors will be using a grading rubric to grade the assignments. It is recommended that learners review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment in order to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Directions:
Write a paper (2,000-2,250 words) that places theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability in the appropriate historic and philosophic context for application in teaching and learning. Be sure to include the following:
An analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning. Which individuals and events had the greatest influence on current philosophies of teaching and learning? Why? (Benchmarks Philosophy of Teaching and Learning 1.1: Analyze the history and philosophy of teaching and learning.)
A discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning. How do leadership theories influence classroom practice?
A discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning. How does accountability influence assessment? How does accountability influence teaching and learning? (Benchmarks Philosophy of Teaching and Learning 1.3: Analyze the relationship between assessment and accountability.)
A discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability by placing them in the appropriate historic and philosophic context for application to teaching and learning.
Benchmark – Foundations of Learning Theory – Rubric
Collapse All
History and Philosophy of Teaching and Learning (B)
40 points
Criteria Description
Analysis of the History and Philosophy of Teaching and Learning (C:1.1, C:2.1)
5: Excellent
40 points
An analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning is presented and is thorough. Information presented is from current or seminal scholarly sources.
4: Good
36.4 points
An analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning is presented. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3: Satisfactory
32.8 points
An analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning is presented. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
29.2 points
A vague analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning is presented, but is incomplete or inaccurate. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No analysis of the history and philosophy of teaching and learning is presented.
Historic and Current Theories of Leadership
30 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of Historic and Current Theories of Leadership as They Are Applied to Teaching and Learning
5: Excellent
30 points
A discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning is presented and is insightful. Information presented is from current or seminal scholarly sources.
4: Good
27.3 points
A discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning is presented and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3: Satisfactory
24.6 points
A discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning is presented. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
21.9 points
A vague discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning is presented, but is incomplete or inaccurate. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No discussion of historic and current theories of leadership as they are applied to teaching and learning is presented.
Philosophic Relationship Between Assessment and Accountability
40 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of the Philosophic Relationship Between Assessment and Accountability for Teaching and Learning (C:1.3, C:2.3)
5: Excellent
40 points
A discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning is presented and is insightful. Information presented is from current or seminal scholarly sources.
4: Good
36.4 points
A discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning is presented and is thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3: Satisfactory
32.8 points
A discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning is presented. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
29.2 points
A vague discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning is presented, but is illogical. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No discussion of the philosophic relationship between assessment and accountability for teaching and learning is presented.
Discussion That Synthesizes Theories of Learning, Leadership, Assessment, and Accountability
30 points
Criteria Description
Discussion That Synthesizes Theories of Learning, Leadership, Assessment, and Accountability
5: Excellent
30 points
A discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability is presented and is insightful. Information presented is from current or seminal scholarly sources.
4: Good
27.3 points
A discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability is presented and is thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3: Satisfactory
24.6 points
A discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability is presented. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
21.9 points
A vague discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability is presented, but is illogical. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No discussion that synthesizes theories of learning, leadership, assessment, and accountability is presented.
Synthesis and Argument
20 points
Criteria Description
Synthesis and Argument
5: Excellent
20 points
Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4: Good
18.2 points
Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3: Satisfactory
16.4 points
Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
14.6 points
Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources.
Thesis Development and Purpose
20 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5: Excellent
20 points
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis.
4: Good
18.2 points
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3: Satisfactory
16.4 points
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
14.6 points
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Mechanics of Writing
10 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing
5: Excellent
10 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4: Good
9.1 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3: Satisfactory
8.2 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.3 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
APA Format
10 points
Criteria Description
APA Format
5: Excellent
10 points
The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
4: Good
9.1 points
Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
3: Satisfactory
8.2 points
Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present.
2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.3 points
Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used.
1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used.
Total 200 points