Rubric required

The Functional Communication Training Process – Rubric

Rubric Criteria

Functional Communication Training 5 points

LIST GRID PRINT TO PDF

Collapse All

Criteria Description

Functional Communication Training

5. Target 5 points

Definition of functional communication training and examples

of how it can be applied in structured and unstructured

academic environments and non-academic environments is

comprehensive.

4. Acceptable 4.35 points

Definition of functional communication training and examples

of how it can be applied in structured and unstructured

academic environments and non-academic environments is

accurate.

3. Approaching 3.8 points

Definition of functional communication training and examples

of how it can be applied in structured and unstructured

academic environments and non-academic environments is

weak.

2. Insufficient 3.45 points

Definition of functional communication training and examples

of how it can be applied in structured and unstructured

academic environments and non-academic environments is

inaccurate.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Challenges 7.5 points

Criteria Description

Challenges

5. Target 7.5 points

Summary of common language and communication challenges

faced by students with ASD and the importance of

demonstrating empathy, tolerance, and sensitivity when

addressing these challenges is insightful. Discussion about the

effects these challenges can have on teachers, students with

ASD, their classmates, and families, including specific examples

to support the value of FCT, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 6.53 points

Summary of common language and communication challenges

faced by students with ASD and the importance of

demonstrating empathy, tolerance, and sensitivity when

addressing these challenges is descriptive. Discussion about

the effects these challenges can have on teachers, students

with ASD, their classmates, and families, including specific

examples to support the value of FCT, is clear.

3. Approaching 5.7 points

Summary of common language and communication challenges

faced by students with ASD and the importance of

demonstrating empathy, tolerance, and sensitivity when

addressing these challenges is minimal. Discussion about the

effects these challenges can have on teachers, students with

ASD, their classmates, and families, including specific examples

to support the value of FCT, is vague.

2. Insufficient 5.18 points

Summary of common language and communication challenges

faced by students with ASD and the importance of

demonstrating empathy, tolerance, and sensitivity when

addressing these challenges is unfitting. Discussion about the

effects these challenges can have on teachers, students with

ASD, their classmates, and families, including specific examples

to support the value of FCT, is ineffective.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Executing FCT 5 points

Criteria Description

Executing FCT

5. Target 5 points

Explanation of the steps in executing FCT, including

identification of the current behavior and desired replacement

behavior, is skillful.

4. Acceptable 4.35 points

Explanation of the steps in executing FCT, including

identification of the current behavior and desired replacement

behavior, is detailed.

3. Approaching 3.8 points

Explanation of the steps in executing FCT, including

identification of the current behavior and desired replacement

behavior, lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 3.45 points

Explanation of the steps in executing FCT, including

identification of the current behavior and desired replacement

behavior, is incomplete and/or incorrect.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Supports and Strategies 7.5 points

Criteria Description

Supports and Strategies

5. Target 7.5 points

Identification of various AAC supports and strategies that could

be used to elicit desired behaviors, such as verbal

communication, signing, pictures, and communication devices,

demonstrates best practices.

4. Acceptable 6.53 points

Identification of various AAC supports and strategies that could

be used to elicit desired behaviors, such as verbal

communication, signing, pictures, and communication devices,

is appropriate for students.

3. Approaching 5.7 points

Identification of various AAC supports and strategies that could

be used to elicit desired behaviors, such as verbal

communication, signing, pictures, and communication devices,

does not demonstrate best practices.

2. Insufficient 5.18 points

Identification of various AAC supports and strategies that could

be used to elicit desired behaviors, such as verbal

communication, signing, pictures, and communication devices,

is inappropriate for students.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Assessing E!ectiveness 5 points

Criteria Description

Assessing Effectiveness

5. Target 5 points

Explanation of the steps used to assess whether a particular

support/strategy is effective in creating the desired

replacement behavior is in-depth.

4. Acceptable 4.35 points

Explanation of the steps used to assess whether a particular

support/strategy is effective in creating the desired

replacement behavior is sound.

3. Approaching 3.8 points

Explanation of the steps used to assess whether a particular

support/strategy is effective in creating the desired

replacement behavior is missing key details.

2. Insufficient 3.45 points

Explanation of the steps used to assess whether a particular

support/strategy is effective in creating the desired

replacement behavior is insufficient.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Timelines 5 points

Criteria Description

Timelines

5. Target 5 points

Discussion of the timelines related to implementing various FCT

supports/strategies and the role of trial and error in

determining which supports are most effective for students

across environments is thoughtful.

4. Acceptable 4.35 points

Discussion of the timelines related to implementing various FCT

supports/strategies and the role of trial and error in

determining which supports are most effective for students

across environments is credible.

3. Approaching 3.8 points

Discussion of the timelines related to implementing various FCT

supports/strategies and the role of trial and error in

determining which supports are most effective for students

across environments is shallow.

2. Insufficient 3.45 points

Discussion of the timelines related to implementing various FCT

supports/strategies and the role of trial and error in

determining which supports are most effective for students

across environments is inadequate.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Collaboration 5 points

Criteria Description

Collaboration

5. Target 5 points

Explanation of why it is important for all members of the IEP

team to collaborate in the implementation of FCT, including

discussion about the importance of parent/guardian and

student involvement in the process to create carryover

behavior for students with ASD, is realistic.

4. Acceptable 4.35 points

Explanation of why it is important for all members of the IEP

team to collaborate in the implementation of FCT, including

discussion about the importance of parent/guardian and

student involvement in the process to create carryover

behavior for students with ASD, is beyond surface application.

3. Approaching 3.8 points

Explanation of why it is important for all members of the IEP

team to collaborate in the implementation of FCT, including

discussion about the importance of parent/guardian and

student involvement in the process to create carryover

behavior for students with ASD, is overly simplistic.

2. Insufficient 3.45 points

Explanation of why it is important for all members of the IEP

team to collaborate in the implementation of FCT, including

discussion about the importance of parent/guardian and

student involvement in the process to create carryover

behavior for students with ASD, is unrealistic.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Organization 2.5 points

Criteria Description

Organization

5. Target 2.5 points

The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential

progression of ideas that relate to each other. The content is

presented as a cohesive unit and provides the audience with a

clear sense of the main idea.

4. Acceptable 2.18 points

The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to

each other. The content provides the audience with a clear

sense of the main idea.

3. Approaching 1.9 points

The content is not well organized even though it provides the

audience with a sense of the main idea.

2. Insufficient 1.72 points

An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence

is indiscernible. The ideas presented are compartmentalized

and may not relate to each other.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Presentation 2.5 points

Criteria Description

Presentation

5. Target 2.5 points

The work is well presented. The overall appearance is neat and

professional. Work would be highly desirable for public

dissemination.

4. Acceptable 2.18 points

The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor

organizational flaws. Work would be desirable for public

dissemination.

3. Approaching 1.9 points

The work is somewhat disheveled and includes several

organizational flaws. Work would barely be presentable for

public dissemination.

2. Insufficient 1.72 points

The work is sloppy or chaotic. Work would not be presentable

for public dissemination.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Mechanics of Writing 2.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language

use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target 2.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language

choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 2.18 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice

and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching 1.9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present.

Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are

recurrent.

2. Insufficient 1.72 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede

meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure

errors are found throughout.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Supporting Research and Documentation of Sources 2.5 points

Criteria Description

(citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate

to assignment and style)

5. Target 2.5 points

Supporting research is compelling and thorough. Sources are

completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to

assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable 2.18 points

Supporting research is credible and relevant. Sources are

documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and

format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching 1.9 points

Supporting research is minimal and somewhat inaccurate.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and

style, although several minor formatting errors are present.

2. Insufficient 1.72 points

Supporting research is ineffective. Documentation of sources is

inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and

style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Total 50 points