Building Rubrics for Evaluating the Competence of Preparing for Lesson Plans of Pedagogical Student

P.T. Huong^1, and C.T.H. Linh²

¹Natural Pedagogical Institute, Vinh University, Vietnam

²Education Department, Vinh University, Vietnam

Cite this paper

P.T. Huong and C.T.H. Linh. Building Rubrics for Evaluating the Competence of Preparing for Lesson Plans of Pedagogical Student. World Journal of Chemical Education. 2017; 5(5):175-179. doi: 10.12691/WJCE-5-5-6

Abstract

This article explores the issue of evaluation in today's education, with particular emphasis on assessing learner competencies. The rubric building steps will be presented to assess the pedagogical students' teaching capacity with five steps: (1) Define the criteria for the preparation of lesson planning; (2) Define indicator of criteria; (3) Describe the level of the indicators; (4) assign points to indicator levels; (5) Find evidence for the criteria; (6) Perform evaluation. From that process, the paper described planning capacity with four criteria: Understanding students, Understanding curriculum, Understanding facilities, teaching aids, Understand the socio-economic and natural characteristics of locality. The criterion of Understanding students includes 3 indicators: Understanding the knowledge base of students’ subjects, Determine interest in learning Chemistry and Biology, Identifying learning styles of Chemistry and Biology. Understanding curriculum includes 2 indicators: Define goals, orientation methods, means and forms, teaching content of lessons during pedagogy practice, Identify teaching plan of the lessons during pedagogy practice. The criterion of Understanding facilities, teaching aids includes 2 indicators: Understanding facilities - teaching aids, Develop plans to use, purchase or make the lacking teaching aids. Understand the socio-economic and natural characteristics of locality includes 2 indicators: Only the socio-economic and natural characteristics of locality related to the content of teaching Biology, Integrate the socio-economic and natural characteristics of locality in teaching Chemistry and Biology. Each indicator is described in three levels: Level 1: Fail; level 2: standard and level 3: Good. Criteria are considered as a useful tool for assessing the teaching capacity of pedagogical students before they attend school teaching.

Keywords

competence assessment, teaching competence, scoring rubrics, lesson plans, pedagogical student, evaluation

Copyright

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References

[1]	Richard B. Fletcher, Luanna H. Meyer, Helen Anderson, Patricia Johnston, Malcolm Rees (2012). Faculty and Students Conceptions of Assessment in Higher Education, High Educ Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011.
[2]	Erwin T.D. (1991). Assesing Student learning and Development, JMU, Virgina.
[3]	Boston, Carol (2002). Assessment and Evaluation, Maryland College Par.
[4]	David D. Wiliam, Scott L Howell, Mary Hricko. (2006). Online Assessment, Measurement and Evaluation: Emerging Practices, Information Sciene Publishing, Hershey. L. Melbourne, Singapore
[5]	Gronlund N. E. (1985). Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching, New York, Mc Milan.
[6]	Hopkin K.D., Stanley J.C. (1981). Education and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation, Prentice hall, Inc.
[7]	Howard B.L. (1986). Evaluating and assesing for learning, New York.
[8]	Maryam Ilanlou, Maryam Zand (2011). “Professional Competencies of Teachers and the Qualitative Evaluation”, International Workshop on Education and Educational Psychology.
[9]	Niko A.J., & Brookhart S.M. (2007). Education assessment of student (5th ed), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Peason/Prentice hall.
[10]	Ostelind S. J. (1992). Constructing test Items, Kluwer Academic Pulishers, London.
[11]	Ostelind S. J. (2002). Constructing test Items, Multi - choice, Constructed - Response, Performance and Other Formals, Kluwer Academic Pulishers, London.
[12]	Rick Stiggins. (2008). An Introduction to Student - Involved Assessment for learning, Upper Saddle, New Jersey Columbus, Ohio.
[13]	Richard B. Fletcher, Luanna H. Meyer, Helen Anderson, Patricia Johnston, Malcolm Rees. (2012). Faculty and Students Conceptions of Assessment in Higher Education, High Educ Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011.
[14]	Alnoor, A.G.; Yuanxiang, Guo; Abudhuim, F.S. (2007). “Assessment Mathematics Teacher's Competencies”. ERIC Number: ED495712, Publication Type: Reports - Research.
[15]	Maryam Ilanlou, Maryam Zand (2011), “Professional Competencies of Teachers and the Qualitative Evaluation”.
[16]	Nitko, A. J. (2001). Educational assessment of students (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill."Rubistar Rubric Generator" (http://rubistar.4teachers.org/).
[17]	Moskal, B. M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: what, when, and how?. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 7(3). Available online:http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=34.
[18]	Harries Isacke. (2011). Backwards Planning: Building Enduring Understanding Through Instructional Design. Shell education publish, Inc.
[19]	Pauline Dickinson, Jeffery Adams. (2017). Evaluation and Program Planning. Elsevier jounal, Volume 65, December 2017, Pages 113-116.
[20]	Ángel Alsina, Sara Ayllón, Jordi Colomer, Rosario Fernández-Peña, Judit Fullana, Maria Pallisera, Marc Pérez-Burriel, Laura Serra, Improving and evaluating reflective narratives: A rubric for higher education students. Elsevier jounal, Volume 63, April 2017, Pages 148-158.
[21]	Carol Evans (2013), Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, SAGE Journals March 2013, Vol. 83, No. 1, pp. 70-120.