Assignment: Introduction

Please introduce yourself to me and your classmates.  In your presentation, please answer the following questions.

• Where do you work (school, district office, other)?
  
• If in a school, at what grade level do you work?
  
•  If in a school, what do you teach or otherwise do to help students succeed?
  
• If not in a school or district office, what is your connection or interest in education?
  
• How many years have you been an educator or other professional if not an educator?
  
• What different roles have you assumed in schools and for how long (e.g., counselor, teacher, principal, resource specialist, teacher’s aide)?
  
• What assessment experiences have you had (e.g., made and administered formative and summative assessments for my classroom, administered and/or interpreted standardized tests, observed and coached teachers or staff as part of an evaluation or professional development process, administered and interpreted placement tests, other)?
  

**Please use my autobiography below for the questions mentioned above.  Feel free to change/edit to cover all the questions mentioned above on my autobiography that is posted below.  Thank you!

Talofa Cohort family!

My name is Joe Bert but I prefer everyone in class to call me Big Joe:.
I was born on December 11, 1976. I spend most of my life here in Hawaii, from childhood to teenager, and now as an adult.  I
am a doctorate student with University of Hawaii-Manoa. I am a Resource Specialist at Kapualani School, under the Special Education Department. I still consider myself as a Special Ed teacher, because my title of being a Resource Specialist is not on paper.

I adore and love my family to the moon and back.  Both of my parents are retired, and are still alive and strong and I thank God for that.  I have six sisters, one passed away in 2000, and two brothers.  My family is well known as educators and health care (nurses) in my extended family tree.  I am grateful that I am in the same EdD Program and taking the same courses with my sister Betty Bert.  My family and I are strong Christian people and we worship the Lord’s name every day.

I enrolled at the University of Phoenix Online where I received my Bachelor of Science in 2007, and at the same University I received my Masters in Education in 2009.

One of the reasons for pursuing this doctorate degree is to gain more knowledge and to become an effective professional teacher. Getting this degree will help me look in to other professional fields in the future.

As for my dissertation that I hope and pray to accomplish, The impact of parental involvement of children with Autism on their social and academic achievement. I’d like to research and learn more about this topic.

I’m not a good writer at all. English is my second language, therefore; I need help with my writing skills. I am glad that this course will help improve my writing skills towards my dissertation paper.

I believe that we all can do our best as a Cohort group to work together as a team/family to tackle any problems that we’ll be facing ahead in this class!

Good luck to you all, and God bless

Assignment introduction
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

Introduction section does not adequately provide the brief overview of the report.
T he selected project and the main tasks carried out are not clearly explained. Page
limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Introduction section provides only a limited overview of the report. T he selected
project and the tasks carried out are mentioned with limited explanations. Many
important points appear to be missing. Page limit may or may not be observed

FAIR
(6)

Brief overview of the report is adequately presented. T he selected project and the
tasks carried out are adequately explained. Some important points may be missing.
Page limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Brief overview of the report is well presented. T he selected project and the tasks
carried out are explained well but may have minor errors. Page limit is well observed
and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Brief overview of the report is very well presented. T he selected project and the
tasks carried out are explained very well. One page limit is very well observed and
utilised ef f ectively.

2.1) PROJ DEL (10%)

8 / 10

Summary of project deliverables
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

Key project deliverables are poorly identif ied, showing an obvious lack of
understanding of the project requirements. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Key project deliverables are not clearly identif ied, showing limited understanding of
project requirements. Page limit may or may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

Some key project deliverables are identif ied and brief ly explained but may have
missed some main points. A f air level of understanding of the project requirements
is demonstrated. Page limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Key project deliverables are identif ied and succinctly explained but may contain
minor errors. A good level of understanding of the project requirements is
demonstrated. Page limit is well observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

All key project deliverables are clearly identif ied and succinctly explained. A very
good level of understanding of the project requirements is demonstrated. Page
limit is well observed and utilised ef f ectively.

3.1) WBS wp01 (17%)
WBS: List of tasks/work packages with brief descriptions

8 / 10

MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

T asks/work packages are poorly identif ied and organised, demonstrating poor
understanding of WBS concept. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Some important tasks/work packages are identif ied and explained but contain
major errors, showing limited understanding of the WBS concept. Page limit may or
may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

Important tasks/work packages are adequately identif ied, explained and organised.
Acceptable level of understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is
adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Important tasks/work packages are well identif ied, explained and organised. A good
level of understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is well
observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Important tasks/work packages are very well identif ied, explained and organised
with some additional ef f ort beyond what is expected. A very good level of
understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is well observed and
utilised ef f ectively.

3.2) WBS DIA (17%)

8 / 10

WBS Diagram
MISSING
(0)

Diagram is not included in the report.

POOR
(2)

T he diagram is poorly developed. T asks/Work packages are poorly presented. T he
style of the diagram does not represent a conventional WBS, showing an obvious
lack of understanding of the concept.

LIMITED
(4)

T he diagram appears to contain some aspects of a WBS with limited tasks/work
packages included. T he style of the diagram does not f ollow a conventional WBS,
showing limited understanding of the concept.

FAIR
(6)

T he diagram is presented with an acceptable quality. T he tasks/work packages are
reasonably consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style of the
diagram represents a conventional WBS but may not f ollow the PMI guideline.

COMPETENT
(8)

T he diagram is well developed and presented with the tasks/work packages
consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style of the diagram generally
f ollows the PMI guideline but may contain minor errors.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

T he diagram is very well developed and prof essionally presented. All the
tasks/work packages are consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style
of the diagram f ollows the PMI guideline very well.

4.1) ST K IDEN (20%)
Stakeholder identif ication
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report

10 / 10

POOR
(2)

Primary and secondary stakeholders are not adequately identif ied with poor or lack
of explanations.

LIMITED
(4)

Primary and secondary stakeholders are identif ied but to the limited extent and
without much meaningf ul explanations of each stakeholder.

FAIR
(6)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are identif ied with adequate
explanations of each stakeholder. Although this may contain some errors.

COMPETENT
(8)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are clearly identif ied with good
explanations of each stakeholder. Although this may contain minor errors.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are clearly and accurately identif ied with
very clear and succinct explanations of each stakeholder.

4.2) ST K ANA (20%)

10 / 10

Stakeholder analysis
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report

POOR
(2)

T he stakeholder matrix is poorly constructed and presented. Justif ication of
stakeholder inf luence/interest is poor, showing the lack of understanding of
stakeholder analysis. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

T he stakeholder matrix is constructed and presented with limited quality.
Justif ication of stakeholder inf luence/interest is provided but this is generally not
accurate, showing limited understanding of stakeholder analysis. Page limit may or
may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

T he stakeholder matrix is adequately constructed and presented. Justif ication of
stakeholder inf luence/interest is mostly adequate but may not all be accurate. Page
limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

T he stakeholder matrix is well constructed and prof essionally presented. Accurate
justif ication of stakeholder inf luence/interest is provided. Page limit is well
observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

T he stakeholder matrix is very well constructed and prof essionally presented. All
stakeholders’ inf luence and interest are very accurately and thoroughly justif ied.
Page limit is well observed and utilised ef f ectively.

5.1) PRES ST R (5%)

10 / 10

Overall presentation and structure
MISSING
(0)

N/A

POOR
(2)

Report is poorly presented and structured; persistent errors in grammar or
spelling.

LIMITED
(4)

Limited achievements in overall presentation and structure; many errors in grammar
or spelling.

FAIR
(6)

Presentation and structure are reasonably clear and consistent; some errors in
grammar or spelling.

COMPETENT
(8)

Presentation and structure are clear and consistent throughout; some minor
errors in grammar or spelling.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Presentation and structure are very clear and prof essional; f ew or no errors in
grammar or spelling.

5.2) GEN FMAT (5%)

8 / 10

General f ormatting requirements
MISSING
(0)

N/A

POOR
(2)

Formatting requirements are generally ignored.

LIMITED
(4)

Formatting requirements are not well observed.

FAIR
(6)

Formatting requirements are adequately observed.

COMPETENT
(8)

All f ormatting requirements are generally well observed.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

All f ormatting requirements are very well observed.

Assignment introduction
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

Introduction section does not adequately provide the brief overview of the report.
T he selected project and the main tasks carried out are not clearly explained. Page
limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Introduction section provides only a limited overview of the report. T he selected
project and the tasks carried out are mentioned with limited explanations. Many
important points appear to be missing. Page limit may or may not be observed

FAIR
(6)

Brief overview of the report is adequately presented. T he selected project and the
tasks carried out are adequately explained. Some important points may be missing.
Page limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Brief overview of the report is well presented. T he selected project and the tasks
carried out are explained well but may have minor errors. Page limit is well observed
and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Brief overview of the report is very well presented. T he selected project and the
tasks carried out are explained very well. One page limit is very well observed and
utilised ef f ectively.

2.1) PROJ DEL (10%)

8 / 10

Summary of project deliverables
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

Key project deliverables are poorly identif ied, showing an obvious lack of
understanding of the project requirements. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Key project deliverables are not clearly identif ied, showing limited understanding of
project requirements. Page limit may or may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

Some key project deliverables are identif ied and brief ly explained but may have
missed some main points. A f air level of understanding of the project requirements
is demonstrated. Page limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Key project deliverables are identif ied and succinctly explained but may contain
minor errors. A good level of understanding of the project requirements is
demonstrated. Page limit is well observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

All key project deliverables are clearly identif ied and succinctly explained. A very
good level of understanding of the project requirements is demonstrated. Page
limit is well observed and utilised ef f ectively.

3.1) WBS WP (17%)
WBS: List of tasks/work packages with brief descriptions

8 / 10

MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report.

POOR
(2)

T asks/work packages are poorly identif ied and organised, demonstrating poor
understanding of WBS concept. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

Some important tasks/work packages are identif ied and explained but contain
major errors, showing limited understanding of the WBS concept. Page limit may or
may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

Important tasks/work packages are adequately identif ied, explained and organised.
Acceptable level of understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is
adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

Important tasks/work packages are well identif ied, explained and organised. A good
level of understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is well
observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Important tasks/work packages are very well identif ied, explained and organised
with some additional ef f ort beyond what is expected. A very good level of
understanding of WBS concept is demonstrated. Page limit is well observed and
utilised ef f ectively.

3.2) WBS DIA (17%)

8 / 10

WBS Diagram
MISSING
(0)

Diagram is not included in the report.

POOR
(2)

T he diagram is poorly developed. T asks/Work packages are poorly presented. T he
style of the diagram does not represent a conventional WBS, showing an obvious
lack of understanding of the concept.

LIMITED
(4)

T he diagram appears to contain some aspects of a WBS with limited tasks/work
packages included. T he style of the diagram does not f ollow a conventional WBS,
showing limited understanding of the concept.

FAIR
(6)

T he diagram is presented with an acceptable quality. T he tasks/work packages are
reasonably consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style of the
diagram represents a conventional WBS but may not f ollow the PMI guideline.

COMPETENT
(8)

T he diagram is well developed and presented with the tasks/work packages
consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style of the diagram generally
f ollows the PMI guideline but may contain minor errors.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

T he diagram is very well developed and prof essionally presented. All the
tasks/work packages are consistent with those identif ied and explained. T he style
of the diagram f ollows the PMI guideline very well.

4.1) ST K IDEN (20%)
Stakeholder identif ication
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report

10 / 10

POOR
(2)

Primary and secondary stakeholders are not adequately identif ied with poor or lack
of explanations.

LIMITED
(4)

Primary and secondary stakeholders are identif ied but to the limited extent and
without much meaningf ul explanations of each stakeholder.

FAIR
(6)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are identif ied with adequate
explanations of each stakeholder. Although this may contain some errors.

COMPETENT
(8)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are clearly identif ied with good
explanations of each stakeholder. Although this may contain minor errors.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Both primary and secondary stakeholders are clearly and accurately identif ied with
very clear and succinct explanations of each stakeholder.

4.2) ST K ANA (20%)

10 / 10

Stakeholder analysis
MISSING
(0)

T he section is not clearly presented or appears to be missing in the report

POOR
(2)

T he stakeholder matrix is poorly constructed and presented. Justif ication of
stakeholder inf luence/interest is poor, showing the lack of understanding of
stakeholder analysis. Page limit may or may not be observed.

LIMITED
(4)

T he stakeholder matrix is constructed and presented with limited quality.
Justif ication of stakeholder inf luence/interest is provided but this is generally not
accurate, showing limited understanding of stakeholder analysis. Page limit may or
may not be observed.

FAIR
(6)

T he stakeholder matrix is adequately constructed and presented. Justif ication of
stakeholder inf luence/interest is mostly adequate but may not all be accurate. Page
limit is adequately observed and utilised.

COMPETENT
(8)

T he stakeholder matrix is well constructed and prof essionally presented. Accurate
justif ication of stakeholder inf luence/interest is provided. Page limit is well
observed and utilised.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

T he stakeholder matrix is very well constructed and prof essionally presented. All
stakeholders’ inf luence and interest are very accurately and thoroughly justif ied.
Page limit is well observed and utilised ef f ectively.

5.1) PRES ST R (5%)

10 / 10

Overall presentation and structure
MISSING
(0)

N/A

POOR
(2)

Report is poorly presented and structured; persistent errors in grammar or
spelling.

LIMITED
(4)

Limited achievements in overall presentation and structure; many errors in grammar
or spelling.

FAIR
(6)

Presentation and structure are reasonably clear and consistent; some errors in
grammar or spelling.

COMPETENT
(8)

Presentation and structure are clear and consistent throughout; some minor
errors in grammar or spelling.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

Presentation and structure are very clear and prof essional; f ew or no errors in
grammar or spelling.

5.2) GEN FMAT (5%)

8 / 10

General f ormatting requirements
MISSING
(0)

N/A

POOR
(2)

Formatting requirements are generally ignored.

LIMITED
(4)

Formatting requirements are not well observed.

FAIR
(6)

Formatting requirements are adequately observed.

COMPETENT
(8)

All f ormatting requirements are generally well observed.

ACCOMPLISHED
(10)

All f ormatting requirements are very well observed.