M105 Assessment Brief Module code M105/01/2023 Module title Lesson Observation and Educational Mentoring MQF level 7 ECTS 5 Task 1 Task type Online tasks Task description Comments in weekly forum Task 1 (10.7.2023): Learners are encouraged to critically examine the main debates on lesson observation, based on the readings provided.
Task 2 (17.7.2023): Learners are asked to critically reflect on one of the three stages of lesson observation: pre-observation, observation, or post-observation.
Task 3 (24.7.2023): Learners are challenged to critically reflect on the innovative approaches to lesson observation discussed in the readings.
Task 4 (31.7.2023): Learners are invited to critically evaluate the role of mentoring in professional development.
Task weighting 40% Task length 250 words Submission deadline Task 1: 16.7.2023 Task 2: 23.7.2023
Task 3: 30.7.2023 Task 4: 6.8.2023
Assessment Criteria Rubric Task 1 Off-Topic Basic Understanding Proficient Understanding Outstanding Understanding 1-2 marks Post is unrelated to the readings or does not choose a theme for discussion. Major misconceptions are evident, and the post does not engage with the task’s critical discussion aspect.
3-4 marks Post identifies a theme from the readings, but discussion is superficial or lacking in critical analysis. The post may not fully engage with the readings, or the arguments might lack clarity and coherence.
5-8 marks Post identifies a theme and provides a well-structured and coherent discussion. There’s evidence of critical thinking, but analysis may not fully explore the theme’s complexities or potential implications. Connections to readings are clear but could be more detailed or nuanced.
9-10 marks Post clearly identifies a theme and provides a thoughtful and indepth critical discussion. Post demonstrates a high level of critical thinking, including an insightful interpretation of the readings and creative or nuanced exploration of the theme’s complexities and implications.
Task 2 Task type Write-up Task description Learners are required to answer one of the titles below.
- Conducting a Lesson Observation: A Critical Evaluation and Methodological Justification
- Choose one lesson observation methodology from the following:
peer observation; pedagogical walkthrough; lesson study. Critically analyse the pros and cons of the selected methodology and/or come-up with an effective strategy how you can inform, encourage and empower educators in your institution to conduct the selected methodology.
- Lesson observation as a tool for further professional development. Discuss
- Design a mentorship model for your school.
- Discuss the role of mentors in promoting teacher professional development.
- Analyse good practices in mentorship programs in Education.
Task weighting 60% Task length 2500 words Submission deadline 4th September, 2023 at 11:00 Assessment Criteria Rubric Task 2 Grading Poor Needs Improvement Proficient Outstanding Introduction The introduction is unclear or missing. The thesis statement is vague or absent. The introduction exists but lacks clarity or detail. The thesis statement is present but not welldefined. The introduction is clear and sets up the paper well. The thesis statement is present and defined but could be more compelling. The introduction is compelling and clearly sets up the paper’s topic. The thesis statement is clearly defined and engaging. 0-1 mark 2 marks 3-4 marks 5 marks Focus The paper lacks focus. The thesis statement is unclear or missing. The thesis statement is present, but the paper occasionally strays from the main argument. The paper maintains a good focus on the thesis statement most of the time. The paper maintains a clear and consistent focus on the thesis statement throughout. 0-3 marks 4-6 marks 7-11 marks 12-15 marks Content Content lacks depth and relevance to the topic. Key arguments are missing or poorly developed. Content is somewhat relevant, but key arguments lack detail and depth. Content is relevant and informative. Key arguments are adequately developed. Content is rich, in-depth, and insightful. All arguments are thoroughly developed. 0-3 marks 4-6 marks 7-11 marks 12-15 marks Style The writing style is inappropriate for an academic paper. The writing style is generally appropriate but lacks consistency. The writing style is appropriate and generally consistent. The writing style is not only appropriate but also engaging and sophisticated. 0-1 mark 2 marks 3-4 marks 5 marks Sources Sources are minimal or lacking, and/or inappropriate for the paper’s academic level. A reasonable number of sources are used, but integration into the paper could be improved. Sources are well-chosen and integrated into the paper, but citation could be more consistent or precise. The paper uses a range of high-quality sources, which are effectively integrated and correctly cited. 0-1 mark 2 marks 3-4 marks 5 marks Format The paper does not follow APA format. The paper mostly follows APA format, with some errors. The paper generally adheres to APA format, with minor errors. The paper follows APA format accurately and consistently. 0-1 mark 2 marks 3-4 marks 5 marks Editing The paper has numerous grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors that distract from the content. The paper has some grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors, but they do not severely detract from the content. The paper has few grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. The paper is virtually free of grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. 0-1 mark 2 marks 3-4 marks 5 marks Conclusion The conclusion is unclear, missing, or does not wrap up the paper effectively. The conclusion exists but is not fully effective in summarizing the main points or thesis statement. The conclusion summarizes the main points and reiterates the thesis statement well but could provide a more compelling final impression. The conclusion effectively summarizes the main points, reiterates the thesis statement, and provides a compelling final impression.