Need assistant with the following: Research-based position paperInstructionsAs you become a leader in integrating technology into curriculum and programs in a preK-12 school or school district, at so

Graduate School of Management and Technology Department of Education Position Paper
Position Paper: Completeness and Insight Weight: 60%	54 – 60 points Virtually all elements of the description portion of the Position Paper are thoroughly addressed in academic English to meet the requirements of the assignment. The paper shows deep insight and will culminate in significant student learning. Technology used is seamlessly and effectively integrated into the unit to maximize learning in the content area. The paper is coherent and well-written: clear, coherent, well developed. The paper contains few if any mechanical errors.	48 – 53 points Most elements of the Position Paper are addressed thoroughly although there may be a few gaps. The paper is linked to student learning and technology integrated to language learning. While some elements of the lesson may show deep insight, the paper is uneven, with some aspects being strong and some aspects needing more development or clearer focus. The paper is written in academic English, although it may have a few grammatical or organizational errors.	42 – 47 points Most elements of the Position Paper are addressed, but many of these elements may lack sufficient detail, depth, or relevance. The paper may have important flaws in coherence, alignment, technology use, and contribution to student learning. The narrative of the paper may have many mechanical errors or may be unclear in many places.	Below 42 points Most elements are superficially addressed, if at all; or a significant number of elements are entirely missing. The lesson may have little clarity or coherence. Technology may not be integrated or the connection to the learning objectives may be totally unclear. The paper may be unacceptable because of a lack of clarity or grammatical correctness.
Position Paper: Quality of Writing Weight: 30%	18.5 -- 20 points The paper is written as an academic essay and provides a full rationale for the thesis.. It consistently shows deep insight about teaching and learning in the content area and about technology's contribution to learning. The paper uses detail and evidence from the unit to support the rationale in a convincing way. The narrative is cogently written, well-organized and well-developed.	16 – 18.4 points The narrative provides a good rationale for the thesis and shows sound understanding of teaching, learning, and technology integration. It addresses most, if not all of the elements required in the paper but may need additional explanation or support in spots. The narrative is well-written, although it may have a few grammatical or organizational errors.	14 – 15.9 points The narrative provides a rationale for the unit, but the rationale may be vague, overly descriptive, or have serious gaps. The section may be poorly written.	Below 14 points The analysis section provides a superficial analysis, at best, has serious gaps, and lacks detail. The section may be unacceptable because of a serious lack of clarity or grammatical correctness.
Use of APA style and database support (Weight: 10%)	9 – 10 points The position paper is thorough and shows deep insight into the nature and scope of the cited works. It draws important conclusions, supported by detail. There are no errors in APA style.	8 – 8.9 points The connection between the narrative and cited works is good but not thorough. The narrative may be uneven, however, and need additional depth or breadth in spots. The detail surrounding the cited works is drawn but not as strongly as it might be. There are 1-2 errors in APA style.	7 – 7.9 points The narrative makes conclusions about learning throughout the semester, but these may be vague, superficial, or unsupported. The connection between the required cited works and the narrative is tenuous. There are 3-4 errors in implementing APA style.	Below 7 points The database does not show any critical thinking about the learning. The section may be unacceptable because of a lack of clarity or grammatical correctness. There are more than 4 errors in citing APA style.

Total Score (based on a possible 100 points): Comments:

Graduate School of Management and Technology

Department of Education

Position Paper

First Name: Last Name:

Date:

Course Label:

Section Number:

CRITERIA

4 (Exemplary)

3 (Accomplished)

2 (Developing)

0-1 (Beginning)

Score (use point ranges in red)

Position Paper: Completeness and Insight

Weight: 60%

54 – 60 points

Virtually all elements of the description portion of the Position Paper are thoroughly addressed in academic English to meet the requirements of the assignment. The paper shows deep insight and will culminate in significant student learning. Technology used is seamlessly and effectively integrated into the unit to maximize learning in the content area. The paper is coherent and well-written: clear, coherent, well developed. The paper contains few if any mechanical errors.

48 – 53 points

Most elements of the Position Paper are addressed thoroughly although there may be a few gaps. The paper is linked to student learning and technology integrated to language learning. While some elements of the lesson may show deep insight, the paper is uneven, with some aspects being strong and some aspects needing more development or clearer focus. The paper is written in academic English, although it may have a few grammatical or organizational errors.

42 – 47 points

Most elements of the Position Paper are addressed, but many of these elements may lack sufficient detail, depth, or relevance. The paper may have important flaws in coherence, alignment, technology use, and contribution to student learning. The narrative of the paper may have many mechanical errors or may be unclear in many places.

Below 42 points

Most elements are superficially addressed, if at all; or a significant number of elements are entirely missing. The lesson may have little clarity or coherence. Technology may not be integrated or the connection to the learning objectives may be totally unclear. The paper may be unacceptable because of a lack of clarity or grammatical correctness.

Position Paper: Quality of Writing

Weight: 30%

18.5 -- 20 points

The paper is written as an academic essay and provides a full rationale for the thesis.. It consistently shows deep insight about teaching and learning in the content area and about technology's contribution to learning. The paper uses detail and evidence from the unit to support the rationale in a convincing way. The narrative is cogently written, well-organized and well-developed.

16 – 18.4 points

The narrative provides a good rationale for the thesis and shows sound understanding of teaching, learning, and technology integration. It addresses most, if not all of the elements required in the paper but may need additional explanation or support in spots. The narrative is well-written, although it may have a few grammatical or organizational errors.

14 – 15.9 points

The narrative provides a rationale for the unit, but the rationale may be vague, overly descriptive, or have serious gaps. The section may be poorly written.

Below 14 points

The analysis section provides a superficial analysis, at best, has serious gaps, and lacks detail. The section may be unacceptable because of a serious lack of clarity or grammatical correctness.

Use of APA style and database support

(Weight: 10%)

9 – 10 points

The position paper is thorough and shows deep insight into the nature and scope of the cited works. It draws important conclusions, supported by detail. There are no errors in APA style.

8 – 8.9 points

The connection between the narrative and cited works is good but not thorough. The narrative may be uneven, however, and need additional depth or breadth in spots. The detail surrounding the cited works is drawn but not as strongly as it might be. There are 1-2 errors in APA style.

7 – 7.9 points

The narrative makes conclusions about learning throughout the semester, but these may be vague, superficial, or unsupported. The connection between the required cited works and the narrative is tenuous. There are 3-4 errors in implementing APA style.

Below 7 points

The database does not show any critical thinking about the learning. The section may be unacceptable because of a lack of clarity or grammatical correctness. There are more than 4 errors in citing APA style.

Total Score (based on a possible 100 points):

Comments: