Assesment+2+outline


 * Assignment 2 – Collaborative group task **
 * Due date: 11th May 2012**


 * Weight: 20%**


 * Length: 1000 words ± 10% (400 + 400 + 200 see below)**

The purpose of this assignment is for you to consider the roles and perspectives of the different people involved in a student’s education and the different contributions that they can make. //You can begin your reading for this task at any time but the online spaces in which you’ll be working collaboratively won’t be opened until 19/3/2012. You’ll be notified by email of arrangements for signing up to online groups.// Your group will consider itself as a Learning Support Team (LST), made up of five people with five different roles. As a team you will be given two case studies from a selection provided. The students in each case study will have some level of disability. You will then decide who will be taking which role for each case study. See the table below for the five roles. You will take two different roles, for example you may be the [|Principal] in Case Study 1 and the Class teacher in Case Study 2.


 * **Case Study 1** || **Case Study 2** ||
 * [|Parent]/caregiver || Parent/caregiver ||
 * Class/subject teacher || Class/subject teacher ||
 * Principal or nominee || Principal or nominee ||
 * [|Special education teacher] || Special education teacher ||
 * [|School counsellor]/guidance office || School counsellor/guidance office ||

A Learning Support Team (LST) carefully considers the needs of the student. From your perspective prepare some detailed notes around the key concerns for the student, the actions you could take in your role and the evaluation methods you will use. Your contribution will be strengthened by participation in discussion with other members of your group as you share your understandings from the readings and, perhaps, your own experiences. Your LST should plan to meet a few times during the preparation of this assignment so you can get a sense of each person’s responsibilities and how they complement each other and to make sure your concerns and actions are appropriate for your role.

Be specific about the actions and make sure they are linked to your key concerns and to the methods of evaluating them. Rather than providing a long list of strategies, discuss at least one action relevant to each key concern, which would be achievable and is likely to work in the context of your role. This discussion will be referenced to literature.

Your group may be asked to share their case study with other students on the EDSP400 website.

To conclude you will then write a brief Professional Reflection on the collaborative process in which you have participated as an EDSP400 student.

A plan for the assignment is contained in the table below. You can use paragraphs or elaborated dot points. You are required to refer to at least three credible references for each case study and include a reference list at the end of your paper. The total word length for your assignment will be approx 1000 words (400 words for each of the two case studies and 200 words for the Professional Reflection).

You will receive an individual grade for your presentation and your paper, which will be submitted through e-Submission on the day of the presentation.

Specify what actions you will take to address those key concerns, keeping in mind your specific professional perspective. Outline how you will evaluate the selected actions i.e. how you will know the concerns have been addressed. || Specify what actions you will take to address those key concerns, keeping in mind your specific professional perspective. Outline how you will evaluate the selected actions i.e. how you will know the concerns have been addressed. ||
 * **Case Study 1** (school student name) My role (e.g. parent/teacher etc) ||
 * Identify three key concerns about the student's learning.
 * **Case Study 2** (school student name) My role (e.g. parent/teacher etc) ||
 * Identify three key concerns about the student's learning.
 * **A professional reflection**: In 200 words write a reflection about your involvement in this group task. What factors supported your active involvement in the LST? What hindered your team? You could also comment on insights gained about working in teams in schools. ||
 * References ||

Assessment criteria for Collaborative Group Task


 * || ==== High Distinction ==== || ==== Distinction ==== || ==== Credit ==== || ==== Pass ==== || ==== Fail ==== ||
 * **Three key concerns from your perspective** || Outstanding and comprehensive response. Shows detailed understanding of role. Clear and perceptive identification of key concerns. || Satisfies all previous criteria with consistent application of role and well developed identification of key concerns. || Good understanding of role and a more focussed identification of key concerns. || Satisfactory response. Demonstrating an awareness of role and identification of key concerns. || Unsatisfactory response. Misunderstanding of role and inadequate identification of key concerns. ||
 * **Your actions** || Outstanding and comprehensive response. Evidence of sophisticated understanding of key issues and strategies for student and the roles. || Very good response, satisfying all previous criteria. Provides an excellent description of effective inclusive strategies and their implementation. || Good response satisfying previous criteria. Strategy is appropriate for role, links to concern, and is inclusive in nature. Well explained. || Satisfactory response. Strategy is appropriate for role and links to concern. || Unsatisfactory response. Strategies not adequately explained or not appropriate to student needs and context. ||
 * **How you will evaluate your actions** || Outstanding and comprehensive response. Evidence of sophisticated understanding of key issues in assessment and evaluation. || Very good response, satisfying all previous criteria. Provides an excellent description of appropriate evidence and method of obtaining that evidence. || Good response satisfying previous criteria. Form of assessment and evaluation described in detail including method. || Satisfactory response. Assessment and evaluation outlined and related to identified concern. || Unsatisfactory response. Limited understanding of methods of assessment and evaluation. ||
 * **Professional Reflection** || Outstanding and comprehensive response. Evidence of sophisticated understanding of the collaborative process. || Very good response, satisfying all previous criteria. Excellent understanding of collaborative process. || Good response satisfying previous criteria. Good understanding of the processes of collaboration. || Satisfactory response. Some understanding of collaboration. || Unsatisfactory response. Limited understanding. No evidence of collaboration ||