HERE ARE SPECIFIC DETAILS ON THE FOUR PIECES OF ASSESSMENT FOR THIS UNIT
In general, markers will be looking for the following qualities in your assignments:
Part 1 - Assessment Report
- Includes a succinct description of the individual with special education needs to whom the task will be taught,
- Includes a summary of the methods and results of assessment/analysis .
- Includes a brief comment on the strengths of the individual and one area to be developed.
- Includes a statement of the hypothesis regarding the specific target behaviour or new concept/skill to be developed.
Note that the statement of the hypothesis must be consistent with the results of the assessment/analysis. (300 - 500 words)
Part 2 - Program Design
- Includes specific teaching objectives.
- Includes a brief review of any relevant literature on the teaching of similar tasks to individual with special education needs.
- Includes a description or analysis of the specific target behaviour or concept/skill to be taught.
- Includes a description of the teaching methods to be used.
The plan for the program design shall include a description of the intervention, including a description of how the replacement behaviour or new concept/skill will be taught. Students must also review one previous study that has evaluated their recommended intervention approach to justify your use of this procedure. The program design also includes a description of the plan for evaluating the intervention using direct observation for data collection (800 - 1000 words).
Part 3 - Portfolio of Program Implementation
- A brief description of the teaching sessions (including lesson plans)
- Charting of progress made by the learner/s
- A brief description of how the intervention was evaluated (to assess whether or not it was in fact working).
- Critical reflections and evaluation of the progress made by the individual with special education needs.
- Recommendations for the future
Phase 2 was the plan. Now students are to implement a series of lessons incorporating on going records of their observations of the target individual with special education needs' learning; reflections on teaching and learning outcomes; and write up the results. The portfolio should describe the intervention program. This description should be sufficiently detailed to enable another teacher to be able to implement the intervention in the classroom. Describe the progress of the individual with special education needs. Evaluate and reflect on the program implementation. Describe how the data was collected. Describe how the intervention program was evaluated (to assess whether or not it did in fact work). This evaluation should include the collection of objective data on the target behaviour and replacement behaviours; or concept/skill development, via direct observation to evaluate the effects of the intervention program. Finally, students are to make 1-2 recommendations for future instruction of the target skill that could be offered to the individual with special education needs' parent or teacher (1,000 - 1,500 words).
Part 4: The Presentation
Students are to record on video or DVD, a short presentation (using up to 10 supporting power point slides) documenting the overall case study and intervention program discussing the relative strengths and weaknesses of the program.
Rationale for Modes of Assessment
Assignments are designed to enable you to reflect more deeply on a particular problem or scenario and to write a considered response.
Assessment Weighting
There are four (4) parts or 4 x separate pieces of assessment in this unit. All four (4) parts must be completed.
Marking Criteria and Performance Descriptors for the 4 x pieces of assessment.
Separate rubrics for each of the 4 x pieces of assessment will be uploaded to the ilearn site.
Students are encouraged to evaluate their work against these criteria.
Performance Descriptors
High Distinction
There is pervasive address of critical points in all responses and a demonstration of deep understanding of all key principles. There are appropriate and concise justifications, descriptions or analyses integrating relevant information. There is no evidence of consequential gaps in understanding of basic principles and a clear ability to generalise concepts and principles to the most difficult examples.
Distinction
There is extensive address of the critical points in all responses and a demonstration of deep understanding of all key principles. There are appropriate and concise justifications or analyses integrating relevant information. There is no evidence of consequential gaps in understanding of basic principles although students may have difficulty in applying some concepts and principles to the most difficult examples.
Credit
There is strong address of the critical points in the vast majority of responses and a deep understanding of the majority of key principles. There are appropriate and concise justifications, descriptions or analyses integrating relevant information. There may be a small number of consequential gaps in understanding of basic principles. Students may have difficulty in applying some concepts and principles to a limited number of examples.
Pass
There is solid address of the critical points in the majority of responses and a demonstration of deep understanding of most key principles. There are appropriate and concise justifications, descriptions and analysis integrating relevant information. Students may have difficulty in applying some concepts and principles to some examples.
Fail
There is poor address of the critical points in the majority of responses. There is little evidence of deep understanding of principles. Justifications, descriptions and analyses would often be incomplete and/or unclear. Students demonstrate a poor understanding of the majority of concepts and principles and are only able to apply these to a minority of examples.
Resubmission
Students are required to gain an overall pass on the unit, but do not have to pass all assessment components. If you perform poorly on one component, you may compensate for this with an improved performance in the other component(s).
Resubmission of assessments or assignments is not permitted.
Disruption to studies and extensions for assignments.
In extenuating circumstances, students may apply to the unit coordinator for an extension to the assignment due date. Reasons for the extension need to be documented through the special consideration form accessible through ask@mq.edu.au and supported (e.g., a Professional Authority Form in the case of illness)..
Extensions will only be granted in receipt of the completed form submitted through askMQ, plus documentation.
Disruptions due to work commitments require a statutory declaration from a work supervisor (e.g., School Principal) starting that the work commitment was not known at the time of enrolment.
Note that:
* It is advisable that students contact the unit convenor via Dialogue prior to submitting their request through ask@mq.edu.au.
Extensions will only be granted in receipt of the completed form submitted through askMQ, plus documentation.
- Emails are not appropriate means of extension requests
- It is essential that you plan ahead and organize your study time effectively. Poor time management is not grounds for an extension.
Extensions are usually not granted on the due date.
University Disruption to Studies Policies and Procedures
You should read these documents and follow the policy and procedures.
Disruption to studies policy: http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/policy.html
Disruption to studies procedures: http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/procedure.html
Disruption to studies supporting evidence schedule: http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/schedule_evidence.html
Disruption to studies outcome schedule:http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/schedule_outcomes.html
Appeals
Appeals against grades for individual assessment components.
If any student has concern about the marking of an assessment, they must:
1. Consult the member of staff who marked the work.
2. If there is no satisfactory resolution, an appeal should be made in writing to the unit convenor within one week of the marked assessment being returned or of results being made available. The student should explicitly state the basis of the appeal.
The unit convenor will review the marking and may, at their discretion, ask for a re-marking by a second marker. If re-marking by a second marker is judged appropriate, the final mark will normally be the average of the two marks awarded for the assessment task. Students should note that the revised mark for the task may be higher, the same, or lower than the original mark.
Please note that it is MUSEC policy to double mark all failing assessments.
The decision of the unit convenor is final.
Appeals against final unit grades
Students should refer to the Grade Appeal Policy at http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/gradeappeal/policy.html and the Grade Appeal Procedures at http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/gradeappeal/procedure.html
Grade Appeals must be submitted within 20 days of the release of the unit results.
Grade Appeals are submitted through ask.mq.edu.au
Academic Honesty and Plagiarism
You must read the University's practices and procedures on Academic Honesty.
These are on the web at: http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/academic_honesty/policy.html
The policies and procedures explain what academic honesty and plagiarism are, how to avoid plagiarism, the procedures that will be taken in cases of suspected plagiarism, and the penalties if you are found guilty. Penalties may include a deduction of marks, failure in the unit, and/or referral to the University Discipline Committee. Details of possible penalties are at http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/academic_honesty/schedule_penalties.html
Other important points:
· Close paraphrasing of another persons’ writing is considered to be plagiarism. You must express ideas using your own words.
· Claim of ignorance of the University policy on plagiarism is NOT a defence within MUSEC. If you do not understand the preceding information, please seek advice from a member of the academic staff.
University Assessment Policies
The University Assessment Policy, Code of Practice and Procedures are available at
http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/assessment/policy.html
http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/assessment/policy_code_of_practice.html
http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/assessment/procedure.html
Standardised Transcript Marks
Your overall unit result will be assigned a standardised numerical grade (SNG) on your University transcript. High Distinction grades are assigned a mark between 85 and 100, Distinction grades between 75 and 84, Credit grades between 65 and 74, Pass grades between 50 and 64, Pass Conceded grades between 45 and 49 and Fail grades below 45. For further information, see the Grading Policy.
Grade Descriptors
The following generic grade descriptors provide university-wide standards for awarding final grades.
High Distinction: Provides consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding in relation to the learning outcomes. There is substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critical evaluation of problems, their solutions and their implications; creativity in application as appropriate to the discipline.
Distinction: Provides evidence of integration and evaluation of critical ideas, principles and theories, distinctive insight and ability in applying relevant skills and concepts in relation to learning outcomes. There is demonstration of frequent originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and providing solutions; and the use of means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience.
Credit: Provides evidence of learning that goes beyond replication of content knowledge or skills relevant to the learning outcomes. There is demonstration of substantial understanding of fundamental concepts in the field of study and the ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; convincing argumentation with appropriate coherent justification; communication of ideas fluently and clearly in terms of the conventions of the discipline.
Pass: Provides sufficient evidence of the achievement of learning outcomes. There is demonstration of understanding and application of fundamental concepts of the field of study; routine argumentation with acceptable justification; communication of information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline. The learning attainment is considered satisfactory or adequate or competent or capable in relation to the specified outcomes.
Fail: Does not provide evidence of attainment of learning outcomes. There is missing or partial or superficial or faulty understanding and application of the fundamental concepts in the field of study; missing, undeveloped, inappropriate or confusing argumentation; incomplete, confusing or lacking communication of ideas in ways that give little attention to the conventions of the discipline.
Fail Grades
Entry into units in the postgraduate coursework program requires a clear pass (i.e., a final unit grade of at least “C” or “P”) in all previously completed SPED units. That is, you will not be granted automatic entry into units if you have failures in previously attempted SPED prefixed units. If you have failing grades on our record (1) you may be allowed to continue at the discretion of the Director of MUSEC (or nominee) with a special approval (waiver), or, (2) You may be required to reattempt the relevant units until a clear pass is obtained.
Students with fail grades MUST seek academic advice before attempting to re-enrol.
Satisfactory Progress
Students are expected to maintain satisfactory progress in a course/program of study. Normally, students will be asked to show cause why their candidature should not be terminated if they fail any unit twice. Further, students may be asked to show cause if they receive more than two conceded passes and/or failures in a course/program of study.
Feedback on individual pieces of assessment
Students will not receive raw scores or percentage scores on their individual pieces of assessment.
At MUSEC, students will receive qualitative descriptors for their individual pieces of assessment.
Good - refers to a very high standard of passing
Sound - refers to an acceptable standard of passing.
Fair - refers to a bare minimum passing standard.
Poor - refers to a response that is not of a passing standard.
The final grade will depend on the weighting and relative performance in each component.
For final (end of semester) grades, all MQ students are given STANDARD NUMERICAL GRADES (SNG).
A SNG is NOT a raw score and a SNG is NOT a percentage.
The SNG is a standardized score for the unit that reflects the weighted grades that students were awarded throughout the semester.
For further information, see the Grading Policy.
Download as PDF