Formative and Summative Strategies and Instructor Satisfaction Surveys for Lesson Plans

IF ADDITIONAL PAYMENT IS NEEEDED, DO NOT HESITATE TO ASK ME. I AM ATTACHING THE PRACTICUM LESSON FROM TOPIC 9.
CONCEPT MAPPING
Assessment Traits
Requires Lopeswrite
Assessment Description
The purpose of this assignment is to understand the link between formative and summative assessment strategies and instructor satisfaction survey data and to develop a concept map illustrating the relationship of assessment strategies throughout the practicum lesson plan you developed in Topic 9.
The effective nurse educator employs a variety of formative and summative techniques during curriculum implementation to monitor student learning. A well-developed lesson plan employs both formative and summative assessments. A nurse educator should plan to use data from these assessments to guide instruction. Information from instructor satisfaction surveys also provides valuable information to guide teaching.
Concept maps describe the relationships between concepts and allow for improved understanding through critical thinking and analysis.
Use the topic Resources and your own research to complete this assignment. Topic Resources include websites with templates, videos, and written materials with more details about concept maps and how to make them. Be creative in your design.
Part 1
Write three short paragraphs (five to seven sentences per paragraph) to provide the foundation for your concept map. Address the following:
1. Describe one formative assessment strategy you selected for your lesson plan. Explain why you selected this strategy and how you will use the results to guide your future lesson plan revisions.
2. Describe one summative assessment strategy you selected for your lesson plan. Explain why you selected this strategy and how you will use the results to guide your future lesson plan revisions.
3. Describe your instructor satisfaction survey. Explain how you will use the results to guide your future lesson plan revisions.
Part 2
Develop a concept map illustrating the relationships among these assessments.
General Requirements
Submit both parts in one Word document.
Cite two or three peer‐reviewed/scholarly resources no more than 5 years old in your paper.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
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.
Rubric Criteria
Formative Assessment Strategy
4.5 points
Formative Assessment Data
4.5 points
Summative Assessment Strategy
4.5 points
Summative Assessment Data
4.5 points
Criteria Description
Why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions are explained.
5. Target
4.5 points
An explanation of why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions is thorough.
4. Acceptable
4.14 points
An explanation of why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions is detailed.
3. Approaching
3.96 points
An explanation of why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions is present.
2. Insufficient
3.6 points
An explanation of why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation of why the strategy was selected and how the data from the summative assessment will guide future lesson plan revisions is not present.
Instructor Satisfaction Survey
4.5 points
Criteria Description
Instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students is described.
5. Target
4.5 points
A description of the instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students is thorough .
4. Acceptable
4.14 points
A description of the instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students is detailed.
3. Approaching
3.96 points
A description of the instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students is present.
2. Insufficient
3.6 points
A description of the instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A description of the instructor satisfaction survey to be administered to students is not present.
Instructor Satisfaction Survey Data Use
4.5 points
Criteria Description
How data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions is explained.
5. Target
4.5 points
An explanation of how data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions is thorough.
4. Acceptable
4.14 points
An explanation of how data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions is detailed.
3. Approaching
3.96 points
An explanation of how data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions is present.
2. Insufficient
3.6 points
An explanation of how data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation of how data from the instructor satisfaction survey will guide future lesson plan revisions is not present.
Concept Map
4.5 points
Criteria Description
A concept map illustrates the relationships among the assessments.
5. Target
4.5 points
A concept map illustrating the relationships among the assessments is thorough.
4. Acceptable
4.14 points
A concept map illustrating the relationships among the assessments is detailed.
3. Approaching
3.96 points
A concept map illustrating the relationships among the assessments is present.
2. Insufficient
3.6 points
A concept map illustrating the relationships among the assessments is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A concept map illustrating the relationships among the assessments is not present.
Thesis, Position, or Purpose
3.15 points
Criteria Description
Thesis, Position, or Purpose Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target
3.15 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable
2.9 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.
3. Approaching
2.77 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.
2. Insufficient
2.52 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.
Development, Structure, and Conclusion
3.6 points
Criteria Description
Development, Structure, and Conclusion Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.
5. Target
3.6 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable
3.31 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching
3.17 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient
2.88 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
Evidence
2.25 points
Criteria Description
Evidence Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.
5. Target
2.25 points
Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.
4. Acceptable
2.07 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.
3. Approaching
1.98 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
2. Insufficient
1.8 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
Mechanics of Writing
2.25 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.
5. Target
2.25 points
No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable
2.07 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching
1.98 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient
1.8 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
Format/Documentation
2.25 points
Criteria Description
Format/Documentation Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
5. Target
2.25 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.
4. Acceptable
2.07 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching
1.98 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient
1.8 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.