This document is a rubric for evaluating a pre-service teacher's field study portfolio from the College of Education at Northwest Samar State University. The rubric assesses the portfolio on 5 criteria: contents, objectives, quality of entries, presentation of entries, and promptness of submission. Each criterion has 5 descriptive ratings ranging from best quality/fullest completion to lowest quality/least completion, with point values from 1 to 5 assigned. The rubric is to be used for self-evaluation, peer evaluation, and evaluation by the teacher's supervisor.
This document is a rubric for evaluating a pre-service teacher's field study portfolio from the College of Education at Northwest Samar State University. The rubric assesses the portfolio on 5 criteria: contents, objectives, quality of entries, presentation of entries, and promptness of submission. Each criterion has 5 descriptive ratings ranging from best quality/fullest completion to lowest quality/least completion, with point values from 1 to 5 assigned. The rubric is to be used for self-evaluation, peer evaluation, and evaluation by the teacher's supervisor.
This document is a rubric for evaluating a pre-service teacher's field study portfolio from the College of Education at Northwest Samar State University. The rubric assesses the portfolio on 5 criteria: contents, objectives, quality of entries, presentation of entries, and promptness of submission. Each criterion has 5 descriptive ratings ranging from best quality/fullest completion to lowest quality/least completion, with point values from 1 to 5 assigned. The rubric is to be used for self-evaluation, peer evaluation, and evaluation by the teacher's supervisor.
Rueda St., Calbayog City 6710 Website: http//www.nwssu.edu.ph Email: main@nwssu.edu.ph Telefax: (055) 2093657 ISO 9001:2015 Certified
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
RUBRIC FOR FS PORTFOLIO
Name of Pre-Service Teacher: _______________________________Course and Section: ____________
Rater SELF PEER SUPERVISOR
Criteria Description Rating
1. Contents of the Portfolio
1.1 Has 90% - 100% of the needed content. 5 1.2 Has 75% - 89% of the needed content. 4 1.3 Has 60% - 74% of the needed content. 3 1.4 Has less than 59% of the needed content. 2 1.5 Has less than 40% of the needed content. 1 2. Objectives of the Portfolio 2.1 Objectives are SMART and cover the whole course. 5 2.2 Objectives are SMART but cover only a minimum of 75% 4 of the course. 2.3 Objectives are SMART but cover only less than 75% of the 3 Course. 2.4 Some objectives are not SMART and do not cover the whole 2 course. 2.5 Most objectives are not SMART and cover only a minimum 1 of the course. 3. Quality of Entries 3.1 Entries are of best quality, well selected and very 5 substantial. 3.2 Entries are of better quality; many are well selected and 4 very substantial. 3.3 Entries are of acceptable quality, some are well selected 3 and very substantial. 3.4 Some entries are of acceptable quality, limited selection 2 and substance. 3.5 Few entries are of acceptable quality, not well selected and 1 very minimal substance. 4. Presentation of Entries 4.1 Creative, neat and has very strong impact/appeal 5 4.2 Creative, neat and has strong impact/appeal 4 4.3 Creative, neat and an average impact/appeal 3 4.4 Minimal creativity, neat with minimal impact/appeal 2 4.5 No creativity, in disarray, no impact/appeal 1
5. Promptness in the Submission
5.1 Submitted ahead of the schedule 5 5.2 Submitted on schedule 4 5.3 Submitted 10 days after schedule 3 5.4 Submitted from 11-30 days after schedule 2 5.5 Submitted 31 or more days after schedule 1 TOTAL
____________________________ (Signature Over Printed Name of Rater)