Skip to main content

- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Training Evaluation Rubric for Curriculum Manager Training

iRubric: Training Evaluation Rubric for Curriculum Manager Training

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Training Evaluation Rubric for Curriculum Manager Training Training Rubric for Otto Instruments This rubric allows the training department at US Army Cadet Command to conduct all levels of assessments on the training presented to instructors on the Curriculum Manager(CM). This rubric will use the Kirkpatrick model of 4 levels of evaluation. Level 1 and 2 will be completed at school where the instructors receive the training. Data will be collected in one rubric to determine if the CM is being fully utilized. The department must analyze level 1-3 assessments. Rubric Code: LXBWW4W By caredfield Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Education Type: Assessment Grade Levels: Post Graduate

Assessment of Training
	Poor 20 pts	Fair 60 pts	Good 80 pts	Excellent 100 pts
Level 1 Assessment: Use of the CM	Poor JROTC instructors have little confidence in their training competency with the Curriculum Manager (CM)	Fair JROTC instructors feel fairly confident using the primary applications in the CM and can probably teach a class effectively 50 percent of time	Good JROTC instructors feel confident teaching a class using the CM effectively in a simulated classroom environment. JROTC instructors feel confident using the CM with the standard classroom content in the CM and can teach a class using it.	Excellent JROTC instructors feel confident teaching a class using the advanced options on the CM in a simulated classroom environment. JROTC instructors feel confident about using the CM global resources and are comfortable adapting the standard classroom content with their own input.
Level 1 Assessment: Testing	Poor JROTC instructor does not feel confident and uses the CM to build assessments, tests and quizzes less than 50 percent of the time. JROTC instructor feels unable to use the CM for the pre-made standard tests.	Fair JROTC instructor feels confident using the pre-made testing options and knows how to print the exams in hard copy for the majority of academic testing	Good JROTC instructor is able to use the pre-made tests and quizzes and game options. JROTC instructor is able to do the testing using the clickers and able to auto record results and transfer them to the grade book Technician meets training goal	Excellent JROTC instructor can complete all the previous tasks but also feels confident enough to be able to create original questions and those specific to their program using the CM. JROTC instructor is able to transfer all grades as a file to the school grade book.
Level 2 Assessment: CM testing	Poor 10 percent of instructors score unsatisfactory on CM proficiency testing.	Fair 20 percent of instructors fail to achieve 80 percent on CM proficiency testing.	Good 80 percent of instructors achieve 80 percent on CM proficiency testing.	Excellent 90 percent of instructors achieve over 90 percent on CM proficiency training
Level 2 Assessment: Presentation	Poor 10 percent of instructors score unsatisfactory on lesson presentation using the CM in a simulated classroom environment.	Fair 20 percent of instructors fail to achieve 80 percent on lesson presentation using the CM in a simulated classroom environment.	Good 80 percent of instructors achieve 80 percent on lesson presentation using the CM in a simulated classroom environment.	Excellent 90 percent of instructors achieve over 90 percent on lesson presentation using the CM in a simulated classroom environment.
Level 2 Assessment: Test Creation	Poor 10 percent of instructors score unsatisfactory on test creation practical exercise using the CM.	Fair 20 percent of instructors fail to achieve 80 percent on test creation practical exercise using the CM.	Good 80 percent of instructors achieve 80 percent on test creation practical exercise using the CM.	Excellent 90 percent of instructors achieve over 90 percent on test creation practical exercise using the CM.
Level 3 Assessment: MTS	Poor 10 percent of Instructors complete Master Training Schedule (MTS) with less than 50 percent accuracy and/or fail to turn it in by required date	Fair 20 percent of Instructors complete MTS with 50 to 80 percent accuracy and submit it by required date.	Good 80 percent of Instructors complete MTS with greater than 80 percent accuracy and submit it by required date	Excellent 90 percent of instructors complete MTS correctly and submit it by required date
Level 3 Assessment: CM usage	Poor 60 percent of the JROTC programs are using the CM for less than the required number of hours and cannot provide data showing that they have downloaded the curriculum and are using it on a separate drive	Fair 70 percent of the JROTC programs are using the CM for less than the required number of hours and cannot provide data showing that they have downloaded the curriculum and are using it on a separate drive	Good 80 percent of the JROTC programs are using the CM for less than the required number of hours and cannot provide data showing that they have downloaded the curriculum and are using it on a separate drive	Excellent 90 percent of the JROTC programs are using the CM for less than the required number of hours and cannot provide data showing that they have downloaded the curriculum and are using it on a separate drive
Level 3 Assessment: Instructor JPA	Poor Instructors receive less than 70 percent on the CM portion of the JROTC Program Accredidation (JPA) Evaluation	Fair Instructors receive less than 80 percent on the CM portion of the JROTC Program Accredidation (JPA) Evaluation	Good Instructors receive less than 90 percent on the CM portion of the JROTC Program Accredidation (JPA) Evaluation	Excellent Instructors receive over 95 percent on the CM portion of the JROTC Program Accredidation (JPA) Evaluation
Level 3 Assessment: School Evaluati	Poor Instructors have received an evaluation by school administration at a less than proficient level while teaching a class using the CM in their classroom	Fair Instructors have received an evaluation by school administration at a proficient level while teaching a class using the CM in their classroom	Good Instructors have received an evaluation by school administration at an accomplished level while teaching a class using the CM in their classroom	Excellent Instructors have received an evaluation by school administration at a distinguished level while teaching a class using the CM in their classroom
Level 3 Assessment: CM Testing	Poor Instructors use CM generated testing tools for 30 percent of their testing requirements Not all JROTC testing can be done using the CM, especially the hands on tasks	Fair Instructors use CM generated testing tools for 40 percent of their testing requirements Not all JROTC testing can be done using the CM, especially the hands on tasks	Good Instructors use CM generated testing tools for 50 percent of their testing requirements Not all JROTC testing can be done using the CM, especially the hands on tasks	Excellent Instructors use CM generated testing tools for 60 percent of their testing requirements Not all JROTC testing can be done using the CM, especially the hands on tasks
Level 3 Assessment: Cadet JPA	Poor Cadet Portfolios receive a grade of 70 percent or less overall on the JPA evaluation Cadet portfolio scores are directly related to instructor CM usage for teaching	Fair Cadet Portfolios receive a grade of 80 percent or less overall on the JPA evaluation Cadet portfolio scores are directly related to instructor CM usage for teaching	Good Cadet Portfolios receive a grade of 90 percent or less overall on the JPA evaluation Cadet portfolio scores are directly related to instructor CM usage for teaching	Excellent Cadet Portfolios receive a grade of 95 percent or higher overall on the JPA evaluation Cadet portfolio scores are directly related to instructor CM usage for teaching
Summative Total

Keywords:

Kirkpatrick level 1-4 model assessments for Learning and Development Dept.

Subjects:

Types:

Assessment

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Education rubrics

More Assessment rubrics

Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Assess

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

Share

Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubric^tm.

Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

n16