Explain how understanding typical and atypical development of K-8 students can be used by all educators to respond to the learning and behavioral

****Please read the directions carefully, must use original work!!!!*** Please read the rubric as well. This is due within 28 hours.

Educators should understand the learning and behavioral characteristics of students with moderate to severe disabilities when providing direct services and supports within the school setting. In turn, teachers can use such knowledge to collaborate with general educators and other professional colleagues when planning meaningful learning activities and social interactions with peers and adults. Expected student progress is made more viable when the selection, development, and adaptation of learning experiences for individuals with moderate to severe disabilities consider individual abilities and other related factors.

Create a matrix to compare and contrast the typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic, and social-emotional development of K-8 students without disabilities, with dyslexia, with mild disabilities, and those with moderate to severe disabilities. Include 3-5 characteristics per student disability type and developmental criteria.

Additionally, write a 250-500 word summary in which you:

Explain how understanding typical and atypical development of K-8 students can be used by all educators to respond to the learning and behavioral needs of students with moderate to severe disabilities.

Explain how collaboration between special educators, general educators, and related service providers regarding learning and behavioral characteristics of students can help create safe, inclusive, culturally responsive learning environments that engage students with disabilities in meaningful learning activities and social interactions.

Support your matrix and summary with a minimum of three scholarly resources.

Typical and Atypical Student Development Matrix – Rubric

Compare and Contrast Typical and Atypical Cognitive, Linguistic and

Social-Emotional Characteristics 22.5 points

Criteria Description

Compare and Contrast Typical and Atypical Cognitive, Linguistic and Social-Emotional

Characteristics of Students

5. Target 22.5 points

Matrix comparing and contrasting typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic and

social-emotional development of students K-8 without disabilities, with dyslexia,

with mild disabilities and those with moderate to severe disabilities is

comprehensive.

4. Acceptable 18.9 points

Matrix comparing and contrasting typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic and

social-emotional development of students K-8 without disabilities, with dyslexia,

with mild disabilities and those with moderate to severe disabilities is complete and

descriptive.

3. Approaching 16.65 points

Matrix minimally compares and contrasts typical and atypical cognitive, linguistic

and social-emotional development of students K-8 without disabilities, with

dyslexia, with mild disabilities and those with moderate to severe disabilities, but

only provides a surface comparisons.

2. Insufficient 15.52 points

Matrix inadequately compares and contrasts typical and atypical cognitive,

linguistic, and social-emotional development of students K-8 without disabilities,

with dyslexia, with mild disabilities and those with moderate to severe disabilities

and/or provides erroneous comparisons.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Collapse All

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Learning and Behavior Needs of Individuals with Moderate to Severe

Disabilities 22.5 points

Criteria Description

Learning and Behavior Needs of Individuals with Moderate to Severe Disabilities

5. Target 22.5 points

Description of how matrix information could support educators in addressing the

specific learning and behavior needs of individuals with moderate to severe

disabilities is expertly written.

4. Acceptable 18.9 points

Description of how matrix information could support educators in addressing the

specific learning and behavior needs of individuals with moderate to severe

disabilities is accurate and detailed.

3. Approaching 16.65 points

Description of how matrix information could support educators in addressing the

specific learning and behavior needs of individuals with moderate to severe

disabilities is adequate, but written at a cursory level.

2. Insufficient 15.52 points

Description of how matrix information could support educators in addressing the

specific learning and behavior needs of individuals with moderate to severe

disabilities is insufficient and/or provides erroneous examples.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Collaboration with General Educators and Related Service Providers 22.5 points

Criteria Description

Collaboration with General Educators and Related Service Providers

5. Target 22.5 points

Description of how matrix information could support collaboration with general

educators and related service providers to ensure inclusion of individuals with

moderate to severe disabilities in meaningful learning activities and social

interactions within the general education setting is comprehensive.

4. Acceptable 18.9 points

Description of how matrix information could support collaboration with general

educators and related service providers to ensure inclusion of individuals with

moderate to severe disabilities in meaningful learning activities and social

interactions within the general education setting is competent.

3. Approaching 16.65 points

Description of how matrix information could support collaboration with general

educators and related service providers to ensure inclusion of individuals with

moderate to severe disabilities in meaningful learning activities and social

interactions within the general education setting is ambiguous.

2. Insufficient 15.52 points

Description of how matrix information could support collaboration with general

educators and related service providers to ensure inclusion of individuals with

moderate to severe disabilities in meaningful learning activities and social

interactions within the general education setting is implausible.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Mechanics of Writing 3.75 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Target 3.75 points

Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-

developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are

varied and engaging.

4. Acceptable 3.15 points

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder

comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some

practice and content-related language.

3. Approaching 2.78 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in

language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct

but not varied.

2. Insufficient 2.59 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Research Citations and Format 3.75 points

Criteria Description

Research Citations and Format (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as

appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Target 3.75 points

All sources are credible, appropriate, and strongly support the submission. All

required aspects of APA format are correct within the submission.

4. Acceptable 3.15 points

All sources are credible, adequate, and support the submission. All required aspects

of APA format are correct within the submission.

3. Approaching 2.78 points

Some citations may be missing where needed; or some of the sources do not

support the submission; or APA is attempted where required, but some aspects are

missing or mistaken.

2. Insufficient 2.59 points

Many citations are missing where needed; or many of the sources are inappropriate

for the submission; or APA is attempted where required, but many aspects are

missing or mistaken.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Total 75 points

Related Posts