09 Dec As the school leader, you will want to initiate change by engaging and collaborating with faculty and staff. Professional development sessions can offer a useful opportunity to introduce n
As the school leader, you will want to initiate change by engaging and collaborating with faculty and staff. Professional development sessions can offer a useful opportunity to introduce new initiatives and create collaborative planning activities for implementation.
Part 1: Establishing a Professional Learning Community
This is a Collaborative Learning Community assignment.
You and your CLC members make up the team of administrators at a school. After assessing the professional development resources available, you all have determined that establishing a culture of collaboration and building trust is essential for your school. You would like to introduce and collaboratively establish professional learning communities to help create this culture. In your CLC group, develop a collective presentation for this purpose using evidence-centered research.
In a 12-15 slide digital presentation, describe how you will explain the purpose and benefits of PLCs. Walk your faculty through designing and planning the implementation of a PLC culture at your school.
Design your presentation keeping with the perspective of leading with purpose as transformational, servant leaders.
Topics to include within your presentation include, but are not limited to:
- Definition of PLCs, including the value of PLCs for teachers and, ultimately, students.
- A mission statement that describes the purpose of a PLC.
- The overall goal of a PLC, including how a successful goal will affect student outcomes.
- At least 2-4 examples of measurable outcomes for a PLC.
- An overall structure of the PLC, including member roles and expectations.
- A timeline to implement the PLC.
- How the PLC outcomes could be evaluated.
- Title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes.
Support your presentation with at least 3-5 scholarly resources .
For items 2-7, in the presenter's notes, describe how you would involve the faculty in creating the output for each topic to collaboratively build your school’s PLC plan.
While APA style format is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the student success center.
** Review the “CLC Participant Evaluation Tool” to inform the topic assignment. **
CLC: Collaborative Learning Communities – Rubric
De�nition of PLCs 6 points
Criteria Description
Definition of PLCs
5. Target 6 points
A definition of PLCs, including the value of PLCs for teacher and students, is
exemplary.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
A definition of PLCs, including the value of PLCs for teacher and students, is precise
and includes key details.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
A definition of PLCs, including the value of PLCs for teacher and students, lacks
precision and/or is missing key details.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
A definition of PLCs, including the value of PLCs for teacher and students, is
inaccurate.
Mission Statement 6 points
Criteria Description
Mission Statement
5. Target 6 points
Mission statement example that describes the purpose of a PLC is exemplary.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Mission statement example that describes the purpose of a PLC is accurate.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Mission statement example that describes the purpose of a PLC is cursory.
Collapse All
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Mission statement describes the purpose of a PLC is inaccurate.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Overall Goal 6 points
Criteria Description
Overall Goal
5. Target 6 points
An example of the overall goal of a PLC, including how a successful goal will affect
student outcomes, is exemplary.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
An example of the overall goal of a PLC, including how a successful goal will affect
student outcomes, is complete and includes key details.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
An example of the overall goal of a PLC, including how a successful goal will affect
student outcomes, is overly simplistic and lacks key details.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An example of the overall goal of a PLC, including how a successful goal will affect
student outcomes, is inadequate.
1. No Submission 0 points
Measurable Outcomes 6 points
Criteria Description
Measurable Outcomes
5. Target 6 points
Examples of 2-4 measurable outcomes for a PLC are expertly crafted.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Examples of 2-4 measurable outcomes for a PLC are complete and precise.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Examples of 2-4 measurable outcomes for a PLC are included, but lack precision.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Examples of 2-4 measurable outcomes for a PLC are incomplete or incorrect.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
PLC Structure 6 points
Criteria Description
PLC Structure
5. Target 6 points
An example of an overall structure of a PLC, including member roles and
expectations, is expertly crafted.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
An example of an overall structure of a PLC, including member roles and
expectations, is complete and includes supporting details.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
An example of an overall structure of a PLC, including member roles and
expectations, is vague and lacks supporting details.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An example of an overall structure of a PLC, including member roles and
expectations, is incomplete or incorrect.
1. No Submission 0 points
Timeline 6 points
Criteria Description
Timeline
5. Target 6 points
An example timeline to implement the PLC is thorough and specific.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
An example timeline to implement the PLC is complete and reasonable.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
An example timeline to implement the PLC is underdeveloped.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An example timeline to implement the PLC is incomplete.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Evaluation of PLC Outcomes 6 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation of PLC Outcomes
5. Target 6 points
An example of how PLC outcomes could be evaluated is expertly crafted.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
An example of how PLC outcomes could be evaluated is complete and includes
supporting details.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
An example of how PLC outcomes could be evaluated is weak and unfocused.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An example of how PLC outcomes could be evaluated is incomplete or incorrect.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Title Slide, Reference Slide, and Presenter’s Notes 3 points
Criteria Description
Title Slide, Reference Slide, and Presenter’s Notes
5. Target 3 points
Title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes are complete accurate.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes are mostly complete and accurate.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes are partially complete and
accurate.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes are incomplete and/or inaccurate.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Presentation Organization and Visual Appeal 3 points
Criteria Description
Presentation Organization and Visual Appeal
5. Target 3 points
The work is well presented. The overall appearance is neat and professional. Work
would be highly desirable for public dissemination. Appropriate and thematic
graphic elements are used to make visual connections that contribute to the
understanding of concepts. Differences in layout, type size, and color are expertly
used.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor organizational flaws.
Work would be desirable for public dissemination. Thematic graphic elements are
used, but not always in context. Visual connections mostly contribute to the
understanding of concepts. Differences in layout, type size, and color are well used
and consistent.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
The overall appearance and organization of material is generally acceptable. Work
would be adequate for public dissemination. Minimal use of graphic elements is
evident. Elements do not consistently contribute to the understanding of concepts.
There is some variation in layout, type size, and color.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
The work is not neat or organized. Work would not be presentable for public
dissemination. There are few or no graphic elements or variation in layout, type
size and color
Organization 6 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 6 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the
required word count.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is
within a reasonable range of the required word count.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with
a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the
required word count.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the
summary is widely outside of the required word count.
Mechanics of Writing 3 points
Criteria Description
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. Variety 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. Inconsistent
language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Documentation of Sources 3 points
Criteria Description
citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and
style
5. Target 3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style. 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 some
key formatting and citation errors are present.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1 No Submission 0 points Total 60 points
,
CLC Participant Evaluation Tool
|
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Student name: |
SELF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate the input received from this group member in the following areas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Quantity – Did work submitted fulfill the portion of the assignment they were requested to complete? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Quality – Was the work submitted of sufficient quality to be include in the final product, with little or no revision? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Timeliness – Was work submitted in the timeframe requested? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional comments: |
|
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Student name: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate the input received from this group member in the following areas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Quantity – Did work submitted fulfill the portion of the assignment they were requested to complete? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Quality – Was the work submitted of sufficient quality to be include in the final product, with little or no revision? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Timeliness – Was work submitted in the timeframe requested? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional comments: |
|
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Student name: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate the input received from this group member in the following areas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Quantity – Did work submitted fulfill the portion of the assignment they were requested to complete? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Quality – Was the work submitted of sufficient quality to be include in the final product, with little or no revision? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Timeliness – Was work submitted in the timeframe requested? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional comments: |
|
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Student name: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate the input received from this group member in the following areas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Quantity – Did work submitted fulfill the portion of the assignment they were requested to complete? |
|
|
Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline. Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax. |