Create a graphic organizer outlining five placement settings inside and outside of the school setting. For each placement setting, describe how that placement can sup

Determining the Least Restrictive Environment – Rubric

Part 1: Graphic Organizer 18 points

Criteria Description

Part 1: Graphic Organizer

5. Target 18 points

Graphic organizer includes an accurate, realistic variety of placement settings inside and outside the school

setting for students with mild to moderate disabilities. Detailed, professional descriptions of the possible

benefits and drawbacks of each placement are provided.

4. Acceptable 15.66 points

Graphic organizer includes appropriate placement settings inside and outside of the school setting for

students with disabilities. Sound descriptions of the possible benefits and drawbacks of each placement are

provided.

3. Approaching 13.32 points

Graphic organizer includes less than five placement settings, or one or more settings are inappropriate for

students with mild to moderate disabilities. Descriptions of the possible benefits and drawbacks of each

placement lack detail or include slightly inaccurate information.

2. Insufficient 12.42 points

Graphic organizer lacks any substantive detail, is wholly inaccurate, or is incomprehensible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Part 2: Essay – Meeting Legislative Guidelines 9 points

Collapse All

Criteria Description

Part 2: Essay – Meeting Legislative Guidelines

5. Target 9 points

Within the context of FAPE, essay comprehensively discusses how the LRE should be appropriate in meeting

student needs and following legislative guidelines.

4. Acceptable 7.83 points

Within the context of FAPE, essay soundly discusses how the LRE should be appropriate in meeting student

needs and following legislative guidelines.

3. Approaching 6.66 points

Essay generally discusses how the LRE should be appropriate in meeting student needs and following

legislative guidelines, but is lacking meaningful detail, or does not fully explain the FAPE connection.

2. Insufficient 6.21 points

Discussion on LRE and meeting legislative guidelines is wholly inaccurate or incomprehensible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Part 2: Essay – Continuum of Placements Process 9 points

Criteria Description

Part 2: Essay – Continuum of Placements Process

5. Target 9 points

The essay thoroughly outlines how schools can determine the best placement to ensure FAPE is provided for

all students with disabilities, accurately describing the process of moving through the continuum of

placements.

4. Acceptable 7.83 points

The essay soundly outlines how schools can determine the best placement to ensure FAPE is provided for all

students with disabilities, describing the process of moving through the continuum of placements.

3. Approaching 6.66 points

The essay minimally outlines how schools can determine the best placement to ensure FAPE is provided for all

students with disabilities. Includes brief description of the process of moving through the continuum of

placements, missing, or not fully representing one or more key elements.

2. Insufficient 6.21 points

Discussion on determining the best placement to ensure FAPE is provided for all students with disabilities

and/or the description of the process of moving through the continuum of placements is wholly inaccurate or

incomprehensible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Research 6 points

Criteria Description

Research

5. Target 6 points

Research is supportive of the information presented. Sources are timely, distinctive and clearly address all of

the criteria stated in the assignment.

4. Acceptable 5.22 points

Research is relevant and generally supports the information presented. All of the criteria stated in the

assignment are addressed.

3. Approaching 4.44 points

Submission includes only 1-2 sources, sources do not fully support claims, or sources are not all credible.

2. Insufficient 4.14 points

Sources provided do not support the claims of the presentation or are not credible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Thesis Development and Purpose 4.2 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Target 4.2 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the

paper clear.

4. Acceptable 3.65 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive, reflective of the arguments,

and appropriate to the purpose.

3. Approaching 3.11 points

Thesis is underdeveloped or vague. Purpose is not clear.

2. Insufficient 2.9 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed

Argument Logic and Construction 4.8 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. Target 4.8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All

sources are authoritative.

4. Acceptable 4.18 points

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. Approaching 3.55 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic.

Some sources have questionable credibility.

2. Insufficient 3.31 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made.

Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 3 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Target 3 points

Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-developed use of practice and

content-related language. Sentence structures are varied and engaging.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Varieties of effective

sentence structures are used, as well as some practice and content-related language.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or

word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice

or sentence construction is used.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 3 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. Target 3 points

All format elements are correct.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is

apparent.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

1. No Submission 0 points

Documentation of Sources 3 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and

style)

5. Target 3 points

Sources are documented completely and correctly, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free

of error.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor formatting errors

are present.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous

formatting errors

1 No Submission 0 points Total 60 points