Video Analysis of Teaching: Final Project Grading Rubric
EDUC 7702/7703
L1
L2
(0-1) (2-3)
L3
(4-5)
L4
(6-7)
Comments
Powerpoint
A. Presentation: Appropriate number of slides presented in
allotted time frame. Presentation was engaging.
B. Content: Overview of VAT experience provided
context and presented objectives. VAT Plan slides
identified an area for improvement, as well as a plan for
improvement.
C. Learning theories accurately identified and rationale for
using them provided. Learning theory and instruction
connected to context and objectives.
Narrative
A. Presentation: APA format followed; appropriate
grammar, usage, mechanics used.
B. Content: Contextualizes the VAT experience.
Discusses, using citations from text, end goals for
improving teaching based on observations of instruction.
Provides a summary that indicates the significance of the
self-observation, self-reflective study.
Overall
A. Project is well-constructed, well-presented, and wellwritten.
B. Project reflects the comprehensive Video Analysis of
Teaching experience that has been the focus of student
knowledge, skills, and dispositions throughout the
semester.
C. Project is both reflective and scholarly. The student’s
work clearly illustrates a sense of professional self in
addition to professional knowledge of teaching and
learning.
TOTAL
1
Rating
Level 1
Novice
Level 2
Emerging
Level 3
Advanced
Level 4
Expert
Description
The candidate’s performance offers little or no evidence of achieving the performance
expectation. Although there may be occasional points that vaguely suggest the candidate has
achieved the expected outcome, viewed as a whole the candidate’s performance provides little
or no evidence of performance expectations. Writing is descriptive in nature and provides no
rationale for or analysis of one’s teaching practices.
The candidate’s performance provides limited evidence that the performance expectation has
been met. Performance may occasionally hint at a higher level of practice but viewed as a
whole the candidate’s performance provides limited evidence of performance expectations.
Writing is primarily descriptive with limited rationale for or analysis of one’s teaching
practices. Practices may not be research based or best-practice.
The candidate’s performance provides clear evidence that the performance expectation has
been met. Performance may not be as detailed or rich as Level 4, but overall, there is clear
evidence that the candidate has achieved the performance expectations. Writing is descriptive,
analytic and reflective. Writing provides clear rationale, analysis and reflection on teaching
practices. Practices are research based and represent best practices.
The candidate’s performance provides clear, consistent, and convincing evidence that the
performance expectation has been met. Writing is rich in description, analysis and reflection
identifying areas of strength and providing suggestions for expansion or improvement in
teaching practices..
2