Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS
Consider what you have learned through your previous practicum experiences and use the balance of your practicum hours to discuss with your classroom teacher the elements of your personal learning philosophy.
Use the “Learning Philosophy Template” as a resource to guide the writing of your personal learning philosophy essay.
In a 1,000-1,250-word personal learning philosophy essay, include the following: Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
- The nature versus nurture concept and debate.
- What it means to be an early childhood professional.
- The role of the early childhood educator as a professional when working with learners, families, and colleagues. Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
- The role of the early childhood educator as advocate on behalf of children.
- Your methods for assessing student understanding for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children, including your views on the statement “all children can learn” and key assessment practices.
- The role of technology in the education of young children.
- The importance of environment to teaching and learning for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children.
Use course readings on particular theories, as well as 3-5 scholarly articles that can be used in support of your personal learning philosophy.
Prepare this assignment according to the GCU guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
2attachments
Slide 1 of 2
attachment_1attachment_1
- attachment_2attachment_2
ECH-125Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
Benchmark Assignment and Rubric
Assignment Instructions:
Consider what you have learned through your previous practicum experiences and use the balance of your practicum hours todiscuss with your classroom teacher the elements of your personal learning philosophy.
Use the “Learning Philosophy Template” as a resource to guide the writing of your personal learning philosophy essay.
In a 1,000-1,250-word personal learning philosophy essay, include the following:
- The nature versus nurture concept and debate.
- What it means to be an early childhood professional.
- The role of the early childhood educator as a professional when working with learners, families, and colleagues.
- The role of the early childhood educator as advocate on behalf of children.
- Your methods for assessing student understanding for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children, including your views on the statement “all children can learn” and key assessment practices.
- The role of technology in the education of young children.
- The importance of environment to teaching and learning for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children.
Use course readings on particular theories, as well as 3-5 scholarly articles that can be used in support of your personal learning philosophy.
Prepare this assignment according to the GCU guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.
Document the hours and locations that you spend in the field on your Clinical Field Experience Verification Form.
Submit the Clinical Field Experience Verification Form by the end of the course. Directions for submitting can be found on the College of Education site in the Student Success Center.
Standards/Competencies Assessed:
Standards and program competencies assessed in the benchmark assignment: Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
- NAEYC: 4a, 6a, 6c
- InTASC: 3a,9a, 10f
- COE Program Competencies:
3.5: Collaborate with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children. (NAEYC 4a; InTASC 3a). Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
4.1: Engage in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes. (NAEYC 6a, 6c; InTASC 9a, 10f)
Scoring Rubric
| Criteria | % Value | 1: Unsatisfactory | 2: Less Than Satisfactory | 3: Satisfactory | 4: Good | 5: Excellent |
| % Scaling | 0% | 65% | 75% | 80% | 100% | |
| Content – 77% | ||||||
| Nature versus Nurture | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. | Philosophical view is provided with clear, theoretical, and scholarly support. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. |
| Early Childhood Professional NAEYC: 6a, 6cInTASC: 9a, 10fCOE: | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes, but is unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes that is realistic. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes that is realistic and insightful. |
| Role with Learners, Families, and Colleagues NAEYC:4aInTASC:3aCOE: 3.5 | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children, but is unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children that is realistic. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children that is realistic and insightful. |
| Role as Advocate | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include how advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood profession. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis realistic. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis realistic and insightful. |
| Methods For Assessing Student Understanding | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Does not include all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. |
| Role of Technology | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include a perspective with young children. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Does not include a perspective with young children. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with young children. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with young children. |
| Importance of Environment to Teaching and Learning | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support.Does not include a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support.Includes a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with both age groups. |
| Organization, Effectiveness, and Format – 23% | ||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 5% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper.It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper.Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Paragraph Development and Transitions | 5% | Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence.No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope.Organization is disjointed. | Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness.Some degree of organization is evident. | Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. | A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent.Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness.Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose. | There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions.Ideas progress and relate to each other.Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader.Paragraph structure is seamless. |
| Mechanics of Writing(includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Writing is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Paper Format (1- inch margins; 12-point-font; double-spaced; Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier) | 4% | GCU template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | GCU template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | GCU template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | GCU template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment) | 4% | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
ECH-125Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy
Benchmark Assignment and Rubric
Assignment Instructions:
Consider what you have learned through your previous practicum experiences and use the balance of your practicum hours todiscuss with your classroom teacher the elements of your personal learning philosophy.
Use the “Learning Philosophy Template” as a resource to guide the writing of your personal learning philosophy essay.
In a 1,000-1,250-word personal learning philosophy essay, include the following:
- The nature versus nurture concept and debate.
- What it means to be an early childhood professional.
- The role of the early childhood educator as a professional when working with learners, families, and colleagues.
- The role of the early childhood educator as advocate on behalf of children.
- Your methods for assessing student understanding for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children, including your views on the statement “all children can learn” and key assessment practices.
- The role of technology in the education of young children.
- The importance of environment to teaching and learning for Birth to Age 5/Pre-K and K to Age 8/Grade 3 children.
Use course readings on particular theories, as well as 3-5 scholarly articles that can be used in support of your personal learning philosophy.
Prepare this assignment according to the GCU guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.
Document the hours and locations that you spend in the field on your Clinical Field Experience Verification Form.
Submit the Clinical Field Experience Verification Form by the end of the course. Directions for submitting can be found on the College of Education site in the Student Success Center.
Standards/Competencies Assessed:
Standards and program competencies assessed in the benchmark assignment:
- NAEYC: 4a, 6a, 6c
- InTASC: 3a,9a, 10f
- COE Program Competencies:
3.5: Collaborate with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children. (NAEYC 4a; InTASC 3a)
4.1: Engage in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes. (NAEYC 6a, 6c; InTASC 9a, 10f)
Scoring Rubric
| Criteria | % Value | 1: Unsatisfactory | 2: Less Than Satisfactory | 3: Satisfactory | 4: Good | 5: Excellent |
| % Scaling | 0% | 65% | 75% | 80% | 100% | |
| Content – 77% | ||||||
| Nature versus Nurture | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. | Philosophical view is provided with clear, theoretical, and scholarly support. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. |
| Early Childhood Professional NAEYC: 6a, 6cInTASC: 9a, 10fCOE: | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes, but is unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes that is realistic. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes engaging in ongoing, collaborative professional development from the early childhood field to inform practice in order to maximize learning outcomes that is realistic and insightful. |
| Role with Learners, Families, and Colleagues NAEYC:4aInTASC:3aCOE: 3.5 | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children, but is unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children that is realistic. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes collaboration with learners, families, and colleagues to build a safe, positive learning environment of openness, mutual respect, positive relationships, and supportive interactions as the foundation of their work with children that is realistic and insightful. |
| Role as Advocate | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include how advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood profession. | Philosophical view is provided with references to theories and scholarly support, but the connection is unclear. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis unrealistic. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis realistic. | Philosophical view provides a unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. How advocacy can promote learning opportunities, strengthen the learning environment, and advance the early childhood professionis realistic and insightful. |
| Methods For Assessing Student Understanding | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Does not include all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes all of the following: Both age groups, opinion on given statement, and key assessment practices. |
| Role of Technology | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include a perspective with young children. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Does not include a perspective with young children. Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with young children. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with young children. |
| Importance of Environment to Teaching and Learning | 11% | No submission. | Philosophical view is provided, but theoretical or scholarly support is not given. Does not include a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support.Does not include a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view is provided with clear theoretical and scholarly support.Includes a perspective with both age groups. | Philosophical view providesa unique perspective with theoretical and scholarly support. Includes a perspective with both age groups. |
| Organization, Effectiveness, and Format – 23% | ||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 5% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper.It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper.Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Paragraph Development and Transitions | 5% | Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence.No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope.Organization is disjointed. | Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness.Some degree of organization is evident. | Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. | A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent.Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness.Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose. | There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions.Ideas progress and relate to each other.Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader.Paragraph structure is seamless. |
| Mechanics of Writing(includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Writing is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Paper Format (1- inch margins; 12-point-font; double-spaced; Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier) | 4% | GCU template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | GCU template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Benchmark – Developing a Personal Learning Philosophy | GCU template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | GCU template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment) | 4% | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free |