Click one dot for each dimension that most resembles the performance in the student project.
The description for each level of each dimension were the most general from the detailed abstracts based on 49 interviews (all dimensions were mentioned in more than half the interviews but no dimension was mentioned by everyone). Together the rating form depicts a rich, collective theory of the development of Reform Rabbinical expertise. The descriptions should not be treated as positivistic or legal definitions.
Interpret each dimension broadly (e.g., projects with class presentation or sermons involve teaching). Other descriptions for each level of each dimension are included in the 100-word abstracts. If these would help to clarify the developmental levels in a dimension, the full abstracts can be obtained copying and pasting the link below into your browser::
http://huc.edu/ckimages/files/Wiki/AllCampusesRubrics2011FA.pdf
The abstracts were based on 269 dimensions from 49 interviews. Forty seven additional dimensions came from the Cohen Committee’s Rabbinical 2008 development matrix. Find these by copying and pasting the link below into your browser:
http://www.huc.edu/ckimages/files/Wiki/Rabbinical_Matrix.pdf
The All-Campuses Dimensions are
(1) Interpret Texts,
(2) Understand Contexts,
(3) Use Hebrew Language,
(4) Apply a Personal Theology,
(5) Discourse,
(6) Writing,
(7) Critique,
(8) Use Sources,
(9) Organize,
(10) Cultivate Jewish Identities,
(11) Serve Reform Judaism & Klal Yisrael, and
(12) Teach and Counsel.
The levels are
Beginning: showed commitment requiring a few minutes to try the dimension,
Easy: showed commitment requiring a few months to learn about the dimension,
Practical: showed commitment requiring a few years to earn a living using the dimension,
Inspiring: showed commitment requiring many years to contribute to knowledge using he dimension.
Three paragraph items are available at the end of the form for you to describe key aspects of the student’s performance that are missing from the 12 dimensions. Raters need to consider both the level that best describes the current performance and the level just above it that the student might think about for the next assignment. The check should be on the level of current performance.