Methodology Assessment Rubric
B
A C
Clear, detailed presentation of the
topic with full understanding; good
Topic Content
arguments; good effective logical
structure.
Appropriate to the content;
Style methodology terms used where
and necessary.
Language Language quality is high (both range
and accuracy), fluent, and natural.
Linking theory to practice giving
good examples from portfolio.
Applications
Flexible and creative in professional
attitudes. Evidence of reflection.
Consistently refers to appropriate
literature, specifying the title and
author. Evidence of critical evaluation
Literature Titles
of reading. Good bibliography with
evidence of reading beyond the
required sources.
Critically evaluates wide range of
Evaluation resources and teaching experience.
Can apply constructively.
Gives own informed views on variety
Views
of issues.
D E
Some Clear, simplified presentation; partial Some
features understanding of the topic; reasons in features
of A and support of or against a particular
some viewpoint given with hesitation.
features Occasionally guiding questions are features
of C. needed.
Terminology sometimes substituted
by general expressions. Searching for
words; prompts necessary.
Language either limited in range or
accuracy; frequent hesitations.
Efforts to link theory to practice; at
times examples from portfolio don’t
show full understanding of the theory
- either limited in quality or
creativity. Limited evidence of
reflection.
Refers to a limited number of titles;
at times can’t specify the title or the
author. Some evidence of critical
evaluation of reading. Good
bibliography containing required
sources.
Limited evaluation of different
resources and teaching experience.
Limited ability to apply
constructively.
Reluctant to express own opinions or
give opinions based on improvised
thoughts.
Little understanding of the topic; Very little understanding of the
of C and
few arguments; often not
some
completely correct; parts missing. incorrect; parts missing.
of E
Simple way of explanation with
frequent pauses and hesitations;
terminology not often used; much
prompting necessary; problems
with accuracy and fluency.
Can give a limited number of
practical examples which don’t
demonstrate the principles, or
good examples without any
rationale. Very limited evidence of examples. Inflexible attitude to
reflection.
Refers to only one title; only
summarises the content, no
critical evaluation. Limited
bibliography; not all required
sources given.
Limited evaluation of few
resources and teaching
experience. Can’t think of
constructive solutions.
Gives hardly any views.
F
topic; arguments sometimes
Lack of terminology; mistakes in
grammar or pronunciation.
No or wrong arguments; no
justification. No evidence of
underpinning theory. Wrong
choice of practical activities and
facts.
There is very little or no evidence
of reading. Candidate can’t
choose the right books or gives
titles they have evidently never
read.
Not able to adapt the content of
the books or experience from
teaching practice and use them
constructively.
Gives no views.