SPF+665+Syllabus

** Multidisciplinary Studies for International Educators ** ** SPF 665 **** - **** Instructional Design and Assessment - ** Designing instruction to achieve specific learning outcomes; systematic models that facilitate planning, developing, revising, and evaluating instruction.
 * Buffalo College, State University of New York **


 * Professor: ** Ronald Lalonde
 * Email Address: ** rlalonde@asdubai.org
 * SKYPE: ronlalonde **


 * Course Description: **

This course involves 2 themes: understanding motivation and classroom strategies that promote engagement. Under the first theme, participants will delve into the changes affecting 21st century youth and explore theories of motivation in order to understand the different ways learners see themselves, school, and learning. The second theme will focus on effective classroom strategies that get the best out of students by creating climates that address student needs while clearly focusing on learning. Included in these strategies will be ongoing considerations of new media and the changing technological landscape on learners and learning.

Course Objectives:

Credits: 3 Semester Hours Course Meetings (All Meetings to be held in the Teaching and Learning Center, American School of Dubai Saturday, March 15, 8:30-4:30 pm  Sunday, March 16, 3:30-8:30 pm  Wednesday, March 19, 3:30-8:30 pm  Sunday, March 23, 3:30-8:30pm  Wednesday, March 26, 3:30-8:30pm  Saturday, March 29, 8:30-4:30pm
 * To reflect critically on the educational and social realities of 21st century students and the goals of 21st century education in order to more effectively plan to address student learning needs and goals.
 * To better understand the elements that contribute to student engagement and to practice strategies in planning, classroom structure, instruction and assessment which research suggests increase student engagement so as to help students derive greater benefit and satisfaction from their school experience.
 * To integrate technology into teaching practices so as to create more opportunities for creativity, collaboration, critical thinking, problem solving, communication and other 21st century learning skills.

1.1.Use instruments to identify individual learning profiles, readiness levels and interests of students as a basis for instructional decisions. 1.2.Design and implement curricular units and lesson plans that reflect differentiation of curriculum, instructional strategies, and best practices. 1.3.Utilize assessment strategies that reflect the individual differences of students and correlate with the instructional strategies. 2.1.Demonstrate creative thinking and problem solving approaches in curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment. 2.2.Establish a physical and emotional environment to support creative teaching and learning. 2.3.Facilitate students’ development of their own creative thinking skills, processes, and products. 2.4.Demonstrate flexibility, willingness to change, openness to new ideas and alternative viewpoints, in meeting professional and personal goals. 3.1.Analyze a unit plan for content, design, instructional strategies and appropriate assessments. 3.2.Evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction and curriculum. 3.3.Collect data and provide feedback on observable classroom practices. 3.4.Design and provide professional growth opportunities. 4.1.Design multiple learning activities with appropriate assessment tools that align to specific content and skill outcomes. 4.2.Use the data from pre-assessments, formative assessments, and summative assessments to inform teaching practice. 4.3.Develop and implement action research study to evaluate curriculum, instruction and/or school programs. 5.1.Apply current technology in educational skills including demonstrating Teacher NETS from International Society for Technology in Education. 5.2.Demonstratethe ability to use computer-mediated collaboration for instruction and professional development. 5.3.Identify and use resources for continued professional growth in the use of technology and to assess teaching practice as well as student outcomes.
 * Multidisciplinary Studies for International Educators **** Program Objectives: **
 * 1) 1. Recognize individual needs of students and differentiate curriculum and instruction to meet these needs.
 * 1) 2. Identify and apply best practices in creative problem solving to meet challenges and demands in international school settings.
 * 1) 3. Demonstrate leadership skills and abilities.
 * 1) 4. Use data-based decision-making for school improvement and practice.
 * 1) 5. Develop and expand skills in the educational application of technology.


 * Course Learning Outcomes: ** The candidate will be able to:


 * 1) 1. Articulate and defend a position regarding the importance of student self-understanding for engagement in learning.
 * 2) 2. Design and implement curricular units and lesson plans that reflect differentiation of curriculum, instructional strategies, and best practices.
 * 3) 4. Describe the forces of motivation and relate them to an understanding of personal motivations and the motivations of students you have encountered.
 * 4) Identify the main forces of transformation in the lives of 21st century learners and reflect on how education can best adapt to these changes.
 * 5) Describe how to vary learning environments, resources, and strategies to nurture creativity, critical thinking and engagement with learning.
 * 6) Use multi-media resources in instructional planning to provide students with opportunities for creativity, collaboration, critical thought and communication.
 * 7) Design and develop resources and approaches that respond constructively to diverse talents and strengths.


 * CHEATING and PLAGIARISM ** are forms of academic dishonesty that can result in an academic penalty, including failure in a course or dismissal from the Graduate Program.
 * Cheating ** is the willful giving or receiving of information in an unauthorized manner during any assessment (test, quiz, exam), illicitly obtaining examination questions in advance, representing someone else's work on assignments as your own, copying computer disks or files, or any other dishonest means of attempting to fulfill the requirements of this course.
 * Plagiarism ** is the presentation of another person's ideas or product as your own, such as: copying verbatim, paraphrasing, inserting artistic work without attribution; or citing the source and creator. You can incorporate someone else's ideas as long as you cite the original work. Follow APA format for all citations, references, and format.


 * ATTENDANCE POLICY: ** Students are required to attend ALL sessions of this course.

//**Content** consists of ideas, concepts, descriptive information, facts, research, and principles that will be presented during this course. This information will be presented through research-based articles, practitioner-based publications, websites, and multi-media presentations.// Students are required to read ALL articles for each part of the course. The articles are directly related to the course content and objectives.
 * CONTENT **

Throughout this course the professor will differentiate the learning **process** by varying activities and strategies to provide appropriate methods for candidates to explore the concepts. Candidates will be given alternative paths to manipulate the ideas embedded within the concept. These strategies will include direct instruction, class discussion, presentations, //active exploration////, // i //nquiry and discovery,// reflective writing, //inductive and deductive reasoning,// etc.The following **course topical outline** is divided into eight parts and illustrates the process that will be used to meet the learning outcomes.
 * PROCESS/OUTLINE of INSTRUCTION **


 * Part One: Welcome and Introduction (Saturday, March 15, 2014) **
 * Explanation of course requirements and logistics
 * Undertaking of Personal Action Research Project
 * Demands and Changes on the 21st Century Student/ Learning Environment
 * Human Motivation and Student Self Understanding
 * Understanding Motivation
 * Rick Lavoie: The Motivation Breakthrough
 * Self Survey on Motivation
 * Strategy Modeled: Placemat discussion
 * ** Required Reading: **
 * o Sagor, R. (2002). //Lessons from Skateboarders//.
 * o Lavoie, R. //Batteries NOT Included//
 * o Viewing: Daniel Pink. //Drive//
 * o Viewing: Rick Lavoie. //The Motivation Breakthrough//


 * Part Two: The Motivation Breakthrough (Saturday, March 15, 2014) **
 * Understanding student behavior (Disciplinehelp.com)
 * Reflecting on learners under motivation categories
 * Student Motivation and //Flow//
 * Understanding Attention and Engagement
 * ** Required Reading: **
 * o Scherer, M. (2002). //Do Students Care About Learning? A Conversation with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi//. Educational Leadership September 2002 60 (1) 12-17
 * o Bjornestad, A. and Schweinle, A. (2012). //Flow Theory//. Education. com
 * o Viewing: Daniel Pink. Drive

>>
 * Part Three: Areas of Engagement: The Social/ Emotional Approach. Mindset and Motivation (Sunday, March 16, 2014) **
 * Self understanding and learning
 * Teaching students about their brains (http://www.brainology.us/)
 * Praise and motivation
 * Dweck Mindset Survey ([])
 * Strategy Modeled: Concept Mapping
 * ** Required Reading ** :
 * o [|Yeager, David S] and [|Walton, Gregory M] . (2011). Social-Psychological interventions in Education: They’re Not Magic. Review of Educational Research. June 2011 (Vol. 81, #2, p. 267-301)
 * Dunleavy, J., & Milton, P. (2009, May). // What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of student engagement and its implications for teaching and learning in Canada // . Retrieved from http://www.cea-ace.ca/programs-initiatives/wdydist
 * Part Four: Areas of Engagement: Choice and Differentiated Instruction **
 * (Wednesday, March 19, 2014) **
 * Contract Activity Packages/ RAFT Assignments
 * Instruction on the development of a **Contract Activity Package** (CAP) (PPT Presentation) Tiered assignments, RAFTs, contract learning, interest surveys
 * Resource: http://www.diffcentral.com/index.html
 * ** Required Readings: **
 * o Wormeli, R. (2005). Busting myths about differentiated instruction. Principal Leadership, 5(7), 28-33.
 * o Schmoker, M. (2010) When Education Fads Trump Priorities, //Education Week//.
 * o Wormeli, R. (2011). Differentiated Instruction: setting the pedagogy straight. //Middle Ground//. October 2011. 39-40.
 * o Caraisco, J. (2007). Overcoming lethargy in gifted and talented education with Contract Activity Packages “I’m choosing to learn!” // The Clearing House, 80 // (6), 255-259.


 * Part Five: Areas of Engagement: Questioning and Models of Student Reflection (Sunday, March 23, 2014) **
 * Pyryt’s P’s and a Model for Enrichment
 * Integrating work on creativity development into the regular classroom
 * Teaching Thinking Keys in the classroom. http://www.thinkerskeys.com/
 * ** Required Reading: **
 * Checking In and Checking Out, Clockwatchers, Chapter 3. pp30-48


 * Part Six: Areas of Engagement: Class Structure and Collaboration (Wednesday, March 26, 2014) **
 * Lesson Schema
 * Gradual Release of Responsibility
 * ** Required Reading: **
 * Fisher, D. & Frey, N. //Engaging Adolescent Learner//
 * Ferlazzo, L. //5 Key Strategies to Get/ Keep Kids Engaged at School//


 * Part Seven and Eight: **** Putting It All Together--Presentation of Action Research (Saturday, March 29, 2014) **
 * Reflection on Lesson Fishbowls
 * Individual and group presentations of Action Research Projects

Bloom, R. (2009). Tactual instructional resources: For whom, why, and how to get in touch. //Insights on Learning Disabilities, 6//(1), 37-44. Caraisco, J. (2007). Overcoming lethargy in gifted and talented education with Contract Activity Packages “I’m choosing to learn!” //The Clearing House//, 80(6), 255-259. Dunn, R. (1990). Can students identify their own learning styles? //Educational Leadership//. February, 1983. 60-62. Maker, C.J. & Nielson, A.B. (1995). Chapter 12: Developing a comprehensive approach. //Teaching Models in Education of the Gifted// (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-ed. Mangino, C. (2009). Small-group techniques for at-risk students: Big advantages with a little assistance. //Insights on Learning Disabilities//, 6(1), 45-54. Sagor, R. (2002, September). Lessons from skateboarders. //Educational Leadership//, 34-38. Scherer, M. (2002). Do Students Care About Learning? A Conversation with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. //Educational Leadership,// September 2002 60 (1) 12-17 Wormeli, R. (2005). Busting myths about differentiated instruction. //Principal Leadership//, 5(7), 28-33. [|Yeager, D.S]. & [|Walton, G. M]. (2011). Social-Psychological interventions in Education: They’re Not Magic. //Review of Educational Research//, June 2011 (Vol. 81, #2, p. 267-301)
 * REQUIRED READINGS **

Cushman, K. (2003). //Fires in the bathroom: advice for teachers from high school students//. New York: New Press. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2008). //Flow: the psychology of optimal experience//. New York: Harper Perennial. Deci, E. L., & Flaste, R. (1996). //Why we do what we do: understanding self-motivation//. New York: Penguins Books. Dunleavy, J., & Milton, P. (2009, May). //What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of student engagement and its implications for teaching and learning in Canada//. Retrieved from http://www.cea-ace.ca/programs-initiatives/wdydist Dunn, R. & Honigsfeld, A. (2009). //Differentiating Instruction for At-Risk Students: What to Do and How to Do It//. New York: Roman & Littlefield. Dweck, C. S. (2006). //Mindset: the new psychology of success//. New York: Random House. Dweck, C. S. (2010, January). Mind-sets and equitable education. //Principal Leadership//, 26-29. Friesen, S. (2009, May). //Teaching effectiveness: A framework and rubric//. Retrieved from http://www.cea-ace.ca/programs-initiatives/wdydist Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). //Switch: how to change things when change is hard//. New York: Broadway Books. Intrator, S. M. (2004, September). The engaged classroom. //Educational Leadership//, 20-24. Kohn, A. (2011, April). Well, Duh! --Ten obvious truths that we shouldn't be ignoring. //American School Board Journal//. Retrieved June 14, 2011, from http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/duh.htm Lavoie, R. D. (2007). The motivation breakthrough: 6 secrets to turning on the tuned-out child. New York: Touchstone. Lemov, D. (2010). //Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college//. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lipman, M. (2003). //Thinking in education//. New York: Cambridge University Press. Marzano, R. J. (2011). Relating to students: It's what you do that counts. //Educational Leadership//, 68(6), 82-83. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Heflebower, T. (2011). //The highly engaged classroom//. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research. Marzano, R. J., The Art and Science of Teaching P21 framework definitions. (2009). Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=504&Itemid=185 Pink, D. H. (2009). //Drive: the surprising truth about what motivates us//. New York, NY: Riverhead Books. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). //Thinking Styles.// New York: Cambridge UP. Willingham, D. T. (2009). //Why don't students like school?: a cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom//. San
 * Bibliography (Additional Resources--Not Required Readings) **

The required assignments will include the **products** that the candidates create to demonstrate mastery of the concepts. Candidates will be required to c omplete the following assessments in accordance with the criteria and guidelines. Due dates will be discussed in class and posted on the course wiki. ** Assignments and Assessment ** ** of Learning Outcomes ** || ** Program Goals: ** ** Multidisciplinary Studies for International Educators ** ||  ** SPF 665 Learning Outcomes **  || 1.1 Use instruments to identify individual learning profiles, readiness levels and interests of students as a basis for instructional decisions. || 4.Describe the forces of motivation and relate them to an understanding of personal motivations and the motivations of students you have encountered
 * PRODUCT/ASSESSMENT **
 * ** Performances of Understanding: **
 * [20%] REFLECTION PAPER: Write a two-page reflection paper on the results of your understanding of the Motivation Breakthrough and the forces of motivation and the results of your own survey. || 1. Recognize individual needs of students and differentiate curriculum and instruction to meet these needs.

3.Identify the main forces of transformation in the lives of 21st century learners and reflect on how education can best adapt to these changes. || 5.1 Demonstratethe ability to use computer mediated collaboration for instruction and professional development. || 1. Articulate and defend a position regarding the importance of student self-understanding for differentiation and creativity and talent development.
 * (10%) THREADED POST DISCUSSION: Respond to a question prompt on the topic of student self-knowledge, differentiated instruction, or motivation and comment on the post of at least one colleague || 2.4 Demonstrate flexibility, willingness to change, openness to new ideas and alternative viewpoints, in meeting professional and personal goals.

3.Identify the main forces of transformation in the lives of 21st century learners and reflect on how education can best adapt to these changes.

6.Use multi-media resources in instructional planning to provide students with opportunities for creativity, collaboration, critical thought and communication. || 4.3 Develop and implement action research study to evaluate curriculum, instruction and/or school programs. || 2.Design and implement curricular units and lesson plans that reflect differentiation of curriculum, instructional strategies, and best practices. 7.Design and develop resources and approaches that respond constructively to diverse talents and strengths. ||
 * [50%] RESEARCH INTO ENGAGING PRACTICES: || 1. Recognize individual needs of students and differentiate curriculum and instruction to meet these needs.
 * [10%] LESSON FISHBOWL AND ANALYSIS: Observe a method of instruction that promotes engagement and analyze teacher strengths and areas for improvement in the implementation of the technique || 2.Identify and apply best practices in creative problem solving to meet challenges and demands in international school settings.

3.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction and curriculum.

3.3 Collect data and provide feedback on observable classroom practices || 4.Describe the forces of motivation and relate them to an understanding of personal motivations and the motivations of students you have encountered

5.Describe how to vary learning environments, resources, and strategies to nurture creativity, critical thinking and engagement with learning || CRITICAL FRIEND: Assistance as a “Critical Friend” given to colleagues in class as they develop their projects and as they work together in computer lab research. || 1. Recognize individual needs of students and differentiate curriculum and instruction to meet these needs. 2.3 Facilitate students’ development of their own creative thinking skills, processes, and products. 2.4 Demonstrate flexibility, willingness to change, openness to new ideas and alternative viewpoints, in meeting professional and personal goals. || 1.Articulate and defend a position regarding the importance of student self-understanding for engagement in learning || The following rubrics will be used to assess mastery of the concepts:
 * [10%] CLASS PARTICIPATION: Demonstrate knowledge of and reflection on readings for each class by engaging in discussions, asking /answering questions, writing reflections, participation in large / small group discussions, panels, case studies, role plays, presentations, and computer lab research.
 * [10%] CLASS PARTICIPATION: Demonstrate knowledge of and reflection on readings for each class by engaging in discussions, asking /answering questions, writing reflections, participation in large / small group discussions, panels, case studies, role plays, presentations, and computer lab research.


 * Reflection Paper Rubric **

Writing contains insightful ideas that are well supported with original and personal details grounded in the theoretical framework || There is comprehensive coverage of the subject matter. Writing contains thoughtful ideas that are supported by appropriate detail and some reference to the theoretical framework || Some aspects of subject matter are covered. Some relevant ideas are supported by appropriate details. || The subject matter is not covered. Major deficiency of appropriate ideas and details. || Sentence structure and vocabulary enhances the reader’s understanding and appreciation. || Text is clear and comprehensible. Developed voice in the writing. Variety of sentence structures and appropriate vocabulary are used. || Text is usually comprehensible, requiring some interpretation on the part of the reader. Voice is developing but is still inconsistent. Limited variety of sentence structure and word choice. || Text is incomprehensible and requires frequent interpretation on the part of the reader. Limited sense of voice. Sentence structure is unvaried and limited. || Engaging introduction and conclusion. Thoughtful and effective use of connections and transitions. || Structure is clear and well organized. Effective introduction and conclusion. Connections are logical and sustain the writer’s purpose. || Organizational structure is strong enough to move the reader through the text. Mechanical introduction and conclusion. Some connections are not in a logical or expected order. || Shows no clear overall structure and organization. The introduction and conclusion are lacking. Connections are confusing or not present. Writing does not stay on topic. ||
 * ** Performance Element ** ||  ** 4 **  ||  ** 3 **  ||  ** 2 **  ||  ** 1 **  ||
 * ** Content and Ideas ** || All elements of the subject matter are covered.
 * ** Communication and Style ** || Text has strong, concise and engaging sense of voice.
 * ** Organization ** || Sophisticated organization enhances purpose of writing.
 * ** Conventions ** || Absence of errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation is impressive. || Minor errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation do not detract significantly from the work. || Errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation are noticeable and detract from the work. || Numerous errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation make the work more difficult to read. ||


 * Constructing Support/ Threaded Post Rubric **


 * ** Performance Element ** ||  ** 4 **  ||  ** 3 **  ||  ** 2 **  ||  ** 1 **  ||
 * ** Makes a claim based on observations or evidence. ** || Makes a claim based on observations or evidence that have been considered carefully and thoroughly. || Makes a claim based on observations or evidence. || Makes a claim that is only partially based on observations or evidence. || Makes a claim without considering observations or evidence. ||
 * ** Provides information that elaborates on or explains the claim. ** || Provides complete and convincing information and examples for the claim. Considers what information and examples are missing and explains how this might affect an evaluation of the claim. || Provides sufficient and relevant information and examples for the claim. || Provides some relevant information and examples for the claim, but provides some that are not relevant. || Provides information and examples that are not relevant to the claim. ||
 * ** Qualifies or restricts the claim. ** || Provides relevant but unusual qualifications for a claim. || Provides relevant qualifications for the claim. || Provides qualifications that represent some misconceptions about the claim, or leaves out some important qualifications. || Provides irrelevant qualifications for the claim. ||
 * ** Engages in respectful dialogue with others’ claims ** || Respectfully comments on a colleague’s claim while asking at least one question for further thought grounded in experience or professional research || Respectfully relates information from personal experience or professional research to a colleague’s claim || Comments on a colleague’s claim with some information that is relevant to the topic. || Comments on a colleague’s claim in a superficial or unhelpful manner ||


 * Fishbowl Lesson Observation/ Analysis **

Interesting inferences are made based on the support provided by the data || Notes refer to the strategy being applied in a relevant way. Inferences are made mostly supported by the data || Notes are somewhat tied to the strategy being applied. Inferences are good but may go too far beyond the evidence || Notes are loosely related to the strategy being applied. Inferences are lacking in quality or reference to the data ||
 * ** Performance Element ** ||  ** 4 **  ||  ** 3 **  ||  ** 2 **  ||  ** 1 **  ||
 * ** Data Collection ** || Notes are comprehensive in their detail, provide as objective evidence as possible, and avoid judgments || Notes are mostly comprehensive and for the most part, avoid judgements || Notes are clear but may have multiple judgments or conclusions rather than evidence || Notes are unclear and/or miss important details from the lesson ||
 * ** Analysis ** || Notes are reviewed with clear reference to the objective of the learning strategy being applied.
 * ** Feedback ** || Clear, productive notes are provided to assist the teacher with future use or revision of the strategy || Notes are provided that give some || Notes are provided but may be insufficiently based on evidence or provide less than constructive feedback || Notes are confusing and may leave teacher with lack of helpful suggestions ||


 * Action Research Project **


 * ** Performance Element ** ||  ** 4 **  ||  ** 3 **  ||  ** 2 **  ||  ** 1 **  ||
 * ** Hypothesis ** || The teacher clearly articulates a reason for and a belief regarding the impact of a new strategy || The teacher articulates a clear hypothesis regarding the possible impact of the new strategy || The teacher articulates a mostly clear hypothesis that is somewhat tied to the ideas under study || The teacher articulates a hypothesis that is only loosely tied to the ideas under study ||
 * ** Strategy Development ** || The strategy is closely related to theory and research and tailored to fit well with the class learning objectives and the student population || The strategy is adopted from a model that has been used before with a view to how it will fit in the class || The strategy is adopted from another source and may be less than ideal for the learning situation in which it is applied || The strategy is not well suited to the learning environment ||
 * ** Implementation ** || The strategy is implemented with fidelity and in a way that is most likely to enhance the student learning experience. || The strategy is implemented with fidelity || The strategy is implemented with most important elements in place || Important elements of the strategy are missing ||
 * ** Reflection ** || The teacher uses data from self and others to make well supported inferences about the success of the strategy || The teacher uses some data to support inferences about the success of the strategy || The teacher supports inferences about the success of the strategy but with thin evidence || The teacher makes inferences about the strategy but with questionable evidence ||


 * Participation and Critical Friend Rubric **


 * ** Performance Element ** ||  ** 4 **  ||  ** 3 **  ||  ** 2 **  ||  ** 1 **  ||
 * ** Content ** || Student shows a full understanding of the topic during discussions. || Student shows a good understanding of the topic during discussions. || Student shows fair understanding of parts of the topic during discussions. || Student does not seem to understand the topic very well during discussions. ||
 * ** Comprehension ** || Student is able to accurately and fully answer all relevant questions posed by classmates about the topic || Student is able to accurately and fully answer most relevant questions posed by classmates about the topic || Student is able to accurately and fully answer a small portion of the relevant questions posed by classmates about the topic || Student is unable to accurately and fully answer relevant questions posed by classmates about the topic ||
 * ** Listening ** || Is always attentive to others when they speak. || Is usually attentive to others when they speak. || Is occasionally inattentive to others when they speak; distracts others' listening. || Is consistently inattentive to others when they speak for a wide variety of reasons. ||
 * ** Information Seeking Questions ** || Asks questions when he or she does not understand what a colleague said; questions are pertinent to main ideas. || Asks questions when he or she does not understand what is being said; some questions may not be pertinent to main ideas. || Asks questions when he or she does not understand what is being said; many questions are not pertinent and do not allow colleagues to effectively communicate ideas. || Exhibits little or no interest in information being shared; no information seeking questions are asked. ||
 * ** Empathy ** || Puts self in others' shoes; accepts and understands the feelings and motivations of others; takes steps to deepen understanding. || Puts self in others' shoes; accepts others' feelings, but does not try to understand others' motivations; is interested in seeking deeper understanding, but does not take active steps. || Accepts others' feelings; does not understand others' motivations and shows no or little interest in seeking to understand others. || Finds it difficult to accept others' feelings; does not understand others' motivations; shows no or little interest in others. ||
 * ** Respect for Colleagues ** || Colleagues are treated with respect. The work of each person is acknowledged. || There is a general atmosphere of respect for colleagues. Acknowledging others' work is serendipitous rather than planned. || Does not indicate respect for the work of colleagues. || Creates an atmosphere that is competitive and individualistic rather than cooperative and supportive. ||