Figure 5 – Instructional Unit Plan Rubric: August 2015-May 2016
Standards
and Unit
Goals

Common Core standards and/or state
frameworks are not identified
Unit goals do not describe the major
concepts, skills, or dispositions the
students will learn or goals not aligned
to standards (less than 75% alignment).


Essential questions for unit not
identified


UCA-CF 1
INTASC 4, 5, 7
TESS 1a, 1b, 1d,
1e, 3a, 3c, 3f
CAEP 1.4
Common Core standards and/or state
frameworks are identified but may not
be appropriate for unit content or
grade level.
Unit goals describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and goals aligned to standards
(75% alignment).


Essential questions trivial and/or closed
requiring a “yes” or “no” answer or rote
answer that can be found in references
or through basic research (e.g., literal
questions, not inferential or evaluative).
Rationale does not provide an
explanation of the unit’s purpose in
terms of future learning, real world
relevancy/application, or student
interest
Rationale is poorly written or copies
verbatim from resources (e.g., text,
provided curriculum materials) or
rationale relies solely on mandated
curriculum (e.g., candidate is teaching
content because it is mandated or in
provided materials/text or on the test).
Rationale does not include discussion of
teaching methods chosen for unit

No clear explanation of the relationship
between the unit and previous/future
class content.
No explanation of how the content of
the unit fits within the national
standards of the discipline (e.g., AMLE,
NCTE/IRA, NCTM, NSTA, NCSS, NASAD)
or connections made are inaccurate.


Common Core standards and/or state
frameworks are identified.
Unit goals describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and goals aligned to standards
(more than 90% alignment).


Essential questions significant and
open-ended enough to drive student
inquiry and linked to discipline specific
theme or issue (e.g., inferential
questions that require students to read
between lines or synthesize information
from diverse resources).

Essential questions significant and
open-ended enough to drive student
inquiry and linked to discipline specific
theme or issue (e.g., inferential
questions that require students to read
between lines or synthesize information
from diverse resources and to make a
conclusion requiring defense of opinion
or rationale).
Rationale provides an explanation of
the unit’s purpose in terms of future
learning, real world
relevancy/application, and student
interest.
Rationale includes discussion of specific
needs and realistic benefits for student
growth and development; however,
discussion relies on generalizations,
bias, or stereotypical thinking.
Rationale inaccurately describes
teaching methods chosen for unit (e.g.,
candidates may explain their unit draws
from “constructivist” theory when it
does not) or does not provide more
than one example.


Rationale provides a clear and
thoughtful explanation of the unit’s
purpose in terms of future learning, real
world relevancy/application, student
interest, and how the unit enhances or
involves learning in other disciplines.
The rationale includes discussion of
specific needs and realistic benefits for
student growth and development.
Needs are derived from student
information/data with more than two
student-specific examples
Rationale accurately describes teaching
methods chosen for unit with more
than two examples.
Explanation of how the unit connects to
previous and future class content is
shallow or flawed (e.g., may not discuss
previous and future or may be written
in generalizations).
Poor or inaccurate explanation of how
the content of the unit fits within the
national standards of the discipline
(e.g., AMLE, NCTE/IRA, NCTM, NSTA,
NCSS, NASAD), (e.g., does not make all

Rationale provides an explanation of
the unit’s purpose in terms of future
learning, real world
relevancy/application, and student
interest.
The rationale includes discussion of
specific needs and realistic benefits for
student growth and development.
Needs are derived from student
information/data with two studentspecific examples
Rationale accurately describes teaching
methods chosen for unit with some
shallowness (e.g., candidates accurately
explains their unit draws from
“constructivist” theory with two
examples).
Explanation of how the unit connects to
previous and future class content is well
developed with two specific examples
Explanation of how the content of the
unit fits within the national standards of
the discipline (e.g., AMLE, NCTE/IRA,
NCTM, NSTA, NCSS, NASAD) with two
specific examples. This connection is
made in addition to discussing CCSS or
NGSS.


Common Core standards and/or state
frameworks are identified.
Unit goals describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and goals fully aligned to
standards.
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q2; T&L Unit
Template Q4
Unit
Essential
Questions
UCA-CF 1
INTASC 4, 5, 7
TESS 1a, 1b, 1d,
1e, 3a, 3c, 3f
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q3; T&L Unit
Template Q4
Rationale
UCA-CF 1
INTASC 2, 4, 5,
7
TESS 1a, 1b, 1d,
1e, 3a, 3c, 3f
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c

Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q3; T&L Unit
Template Q3

Connection
s

UCA-CF 1
INTASC 4, 5, 7
TESS 1a, 1b, 1d,
1e, 3a, 3c, 3f
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c

Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template










Explanation of how the unit connects to
previous and future class content is well
developed with more than two specific
examples
Explanation of how the content of the
unit fits within the national standards of
the discipline (e.g., AMLE, NCTE/IRA,
NCTM, NSTA, NCSS, NASAD) with more
than two specific examples. This
Q3; T&L Unit
Template Q3
Learner
Developme
nt

UCA-CF 1, 2
INTASC 1
TESS 1b, 1c, 1e,
3c
CAEP 1.1a, 2.3
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q1; T&L Unit
Template Q1
Learner
Diversity


UCA-CF 1, 2
INTASC 2
TESS 1b
CAEP 1.1a, 2.3

Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q1; T&L Unit
Template Q1
Assessment
Plan
UCA-CF 4
INTASC 6, 9
TESS 1f, 3d, 4a,
4b, 4e, 4f
CAEP 1.2
Evidence
Source: ELSE

Discussion of unit’s developmental
appropriateness is inaccurate or
includes only one developmental
category (e.g., cognitive, linguistic,
social, emotional, physical). Major
theorists/theories for learner
development (e.g., Piaget, Vygotsky,
Erikson, Kohlberg, Gilligan) are not
referenced or are inaccurately
referenced.
Information reflects generalizations,
bias, or stereotypical thinking or does
not reference specific student(s) or
does not reference how information on
students was collected or does not
provide examples.

Consideration of learner diversity is not
included or is inaccurate or includes
only one diversity category (e.g.,
learning styles, ethnicity, language,
exceptionalities, gender, gender
identity, and SES).
Information reflects generalizations,
bias, or stereotypical thinking or does
not reference specific student(s) or
does not reference how information on
students was collected or does not
provide examples recognizing how
diverse learners process information
and develop skills; no evidence of
planning multiple approaches to
learning that engage a range of learner
preferences; no evidence of including
multiple perspectives to include
learners’ personal, family, community,
and cultural experiences and norms

Poor explanation provided for
assessment design/selection (e.g.,
rationale provided for fewer than 75%
of assessments) or no criteria for
quality work or assessment established
or assessment cannot be used to
support student growth.




connections accurately, leaves out
connections, or explanation is shallow).
This connection is made in addition to
discussing CCSS or NGSS
Discussion of unit’s developmental
appropriateness includes two
developmental categories (e.g.,
cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional,
physical). Major theorists/theories for
learner development (e.g., Piaget,
Vygotsky, Erikson, Kohlberg, Gilligan)
are referenced but only one example
provided.
Information reflects generalizations,
bias, or stereotypical thinking or does
not reference specific student(s) or
reference how information on students
was collected or does not provide more
than one example.
connection is made in addition to
discussing CCSS or NGSS.


Consideration of learner diversity
includes discussion of two diversity
categories (e.g., learning styles,
ethnicity, language, exceptionalities,
gender, gender identity, and SES).
Information reflects generalizations,
bias, or stereotypical thinking or does
not reference specific student(s) or
reference how information on students
was collected or does not provide more
than one example recognizing how
diverse learners process information
and develop skills or planning multiple
approaches to learning that engage a
range of learner preferences or
including multiple perspectives to
include learners’ personal, family,
community, and cultural experiences
and norms

Explanation provided for assessment
design/selection (e.g., rationale
explains 75% of assessments) and
criteria provided for quality work but
assessment may not support student
growth.
Teacher has plan to adjust lesson based
on preassessment and/or formative



Discussion of unit’s developmental
appropriateness includes two
developmental categories (e.g.,
cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional,
physical). Major theorists/theories for
learner development (e.g., Piaget,
Vygotsky, Erikson, Kohlberg, Gilligan)
are referenced with two examples
provided.
Information references specific
student(s) and how information on
students was collected and will be used.
Includes discussion on how to support
students to build on strengths and
strengthen areas of weakness and
provides two examples. Includes
explanation for differentiation of unit
content and/or delivery in general
terms.
Consideration of learner diversity
includes discussion of two diversity
categories (e.g., learning styles,
ethnicity, language, exceptionalities,
gender, gender identity, and SES).
Information references specific
student(s) and how information on
students was collected and will be used.
Includes discussion on how to support
students and provides two examples.
Includes explanation for differentiation
of unit content and/or delivery in
general terms recognizing how diverse
learners process information and
develop skills or planning multiple
approaches to learning that engage a
range of learner preferences or
including multiple perspectives to
include learners’ personal, family,
community, and cultural experiences
and norms

Explanation provided for assessment
design/selection (e.g., rationale
provided for 90% of assessments) and
criteria provided for quality work and
assessment can be used to support
student growth.
Teacher has plan to adjust lesson based
on preassessment and/or formative





Discussion of unit’s developmental
appropriateness includes more than
two developmental categories (e.g.,
cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional,
physical). Major theorists/theories for
learner development (e.g., Piaget,
Vygotsky, Erikson, Kohlberg, Gilligan)
are referenced with more than two
examples provided.
Information references specific
student(s) and how information on
students was collected and will be used.
Includes discussion on how to support
students to build on strengths and
strengthen areas of weakness and
provides more than two examples.
Includes explanation for differentiation
of unit content and/or delivery for
specific students.
Consideration of learner diversity
includes discussion of more than two
diversity categories (e.g., learning
styles, ethnicity, language,
exceptionalities, gender, gender
identity, and SES).
Information references specific
student(s) and how information on
students was collected and will be used.
Includes discussion on how to support
students and provides more than two
examples. Includes explanation for
differentiation of unit content and/or
delivery for specific students
recognizing how diverse learners
process information and develop skills
or planning multiple approaches to
learning that engage a range of learner
preferences or including multiple
perspectives to include learners’
personal, family, community, and
cultural experiences and norms
Explanation provided for assessment
design/selection (e.g., rationale fully
explains all assessments) and criteria
provided for quality work and
assessment can be used to support
student growth.
Teacher has plan to adjust lesson based
on preassessment and/or formative
assessment results and provides more
Unit Template
Q5; T&L Unit
Template Q5
Lesson
Objectives




UCA-CF 1
INTASC 4, 5, 7
TESS 1a, 1b, 1d,
1e, 3a, 3c, 3f
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c,
1.4
assessment results and provides one
example
Teacher does not have plan to adjust
lesson based on preassessment and/or
formative assessment results
Lesson objectives not clearly written in
terms of measurable student outcomes
Lesson objectives do not describe the
major concepts, skills, or dispositions
the students will learn or objectives not
aligned to goals (less than than 75%
alignment).

Lessons reflect a consistently teachercentered focus (e.g., teacher lecture,
teacher-directed activities).
Insufficient variety present in
instructional strategies (e.g. two or
fewer strategies present) with focus on
finding one “right” or “correct” answer
or solution.
Little to no evidence of collaboration
between teacher/student and
student/student throughout unit (e.g.
two or fewer collaboration
opportunities present). Collaboration
may take form of group work and does
not involve students having roles
and/or responsibilities and individual
accountability

Lessons include minimal detail or lack
clear articulation and resemble more of
a list or do not describe specific
concept, skills, or dispositions the
students will learn.
Lessons do not align objectives,
activities, and assessments for majority
of lessons (fewer than 75%). (e.g., a
candidate may list an activity that does
not have an underlying objective or
linked assessment)



More than half of lesson objectives are
written as measurable student
outcomes.
Objectives describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and objectives aligned to goals
(75% alignment).

Lessons reflect a more teachercentered focus than student-centered
focus (e.g., teacher lecture, teacher
directed activities) with more than half
of lessons using teacher-centered
approaches.
Some variety present in instructional
strategies (e.g. three instructional
strategies present) but with focus on
finding one “right” or “correct” answer
or solution.
Minimal evidence of collaboration
between teacher/student or
student/student throughout unit (e.g.
collaboration opportunities present in
fewer than half of the lessons).
Collaboration may take form of group
work and does not involve students
having roles and/or responsibilities and
individual accountability

Lessons articulated with sufficient detail
(e.g., a substitute teacher could
implement based on level of written
detail and some guesswork) and
describe specific concept, skills, or
dispositions the students will learn.
Lessons align objectives, activities, and
assessments with 75% alignment across
elements (e.g., a candidate may list an
activity that does not have an
underlying objective or linked
assessment)


assessment results and provides two
examples
Lesson objectives are written as
measurable student outcomes.
Objectives describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and objectives aligned to goals
(more than 90% alignment).

Lessons reflect a more studentcentered focus than teacher-centered
focus (e.g., inquiry, open ended
activities) with more than half of
lessons using student-centered
approaches.
Lessons include a variety of
instructional strategies (e.g., 3-4) with
options for more than one “right” or
“correct” answer or solution. Methods
allow learner autonomy in examining
new concepts in relationship to their
existing content knowledge or and
engages learners in identifying diverse
perspectives in the discipline.
Evidence of multiple opportunities for
collaboration between teacher/student
or student/student throughout unit
(e.g., collaboration opportunities
present in more than half of the
lessons). Collaboration is more than
simply “group work” and involves
students having roles, responsibilities,
and individual accountability
Lessons clearly articulated (e.g., a
substitute teacher could implement
based on level of written detail) and
describe specific concept, skills, or
dispositions the students will learn.
Lesson plans align objectives, activities,
and assessments with 90% alignment
across elements (e.g., a candidate may
list an activity that does not have an
underlying objective or linked
assessment).


than two examples including
differentiation for student needs and
interests and/or including learners in
their own self-assessment
Lesson objectives are written as
measureable student outcomes.
Objectives describe the major concepts,
skills, or dispositions the students will
learn and objectives fully aligned to
goals.
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Lesson Plans;
T&L Unit
Template Q4
and Lesson
Plans
Instruction
UCA-CF 1, 3
INTASC 3, 7, 8
TESS 1b, 1d, 1e,
2a, 2b, 2c, 2d,
2e, 3b, 3c
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Lesson Plans;
T&L Lesson
Plans
Lesson
Plans
UCA-CF 1
INTASC 7
TESS 1b, 1d, 1e
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Lesson Plans;
T&L Lesson
Plans
















Lessons reflect a consistently studentcentered focus (e.g., inquiry, open
ended activities) with all lessons using
student-centered approaches.
Lessons include a variety of
instructional strategies (e.g., more than
4) with options for more than one
“right” or “correct” answer or solution.
Methods allow learner autonomy in
examining new concepts in relationship
to their existing content knowledge and
engages learners in identifying diverse
perspectives in the discipline.
Evidence of frequent opportunities for
collaboration between teacher/student
and student/student through unit in all
lessons. Collaboration is more than
simply “group work” and involves
students having roles, responsibilities,
and individual accountability
Lessons articulated (e.g., a substitute
teacher could implement based on level
of written detail) describe specific
concept, skills, or dispositions the
students will learn.
Lesson plans fully align objectives,
activities, and assessments
Lesson plans follow logical sequence
with minor inconsistencies and follow
required format and include all
required elements

Assessment
s
UCA-CF 4
INTASC 6, 9
TESS 1f, 3d, 4a,
4b, 4e, 4f
CAEP 1.2


Evidence
Source: ELSE
Unit Template
Q5 and Lesson
Plans; T&L Unit
Template Q5
and Lesson
Plans
Critical
Thinking

UCA-CF 1
INTASC 5, 8
TESS 2b, 3a, 3b,
3c, 3f
CAEP 1.1b, 1.1c

Evidence
Source: ELSE
Lesson Plans
Q2; T&L Unit
Template Q4
and Lesson
Plans


Materials
and
Resources
UCA-CF 1
INTASC 7
TESS 1b, 1d, 1e
CAEP 1.1a,
1.1b, 1.5
Evidence
Source: ELSE
Lesson Plans;
T&L Lesson
Plans



Lesson plans do not follow logical
sequence or do not follow required
format or do not contain all required
elements
Candidate uses, designs, or adapts a
variety of classroom formative
assessments but does not align the
assessment to the learning objective
and activities (less than 75% alignment)
Insufficient variety present (e.g., two or
fewer assessment strategies present)
with focus on finding one “right” or
“correct” answer or solution. Not all
pre/post/ formative assessments
provided.

Lessons address Blooms taxonomy with
primary focus on lower levels
(understanding, comprehension).
Planned activities allow little room for
critical or creative thinking and problem
solving and students are not provided
opportunities for input, choice, or
opinion.
Learners are not presented with issues,
problems, or questions and do not
explore possible solutions, actions, or
answers or are not provided
opportunities to gather, organize, and
evaluate information and ideas from
digital and other resources.
Learners are not provided opportunities
to demonstrate their understanding in
unique ways (e.g., invention, combining
ideas, model making, visual illustration,
metaphor).

Candidate only uses textbook and/or
text-based resources for instruction
Materials for lessons not listed or there
is no explanation provided for how
materials support student learning
(e.g., rational explains less than 75% of
materials)
When technology is used, it is not used
to support student learning or support
is at rote levels (e.g., remembering,
understanding)








Lesson plans follow logical sequence
with minor inconsistencies and follow
required format and include all
required elements
Candidate uses, designs, or adapts a
variety of classroom formative
assessments and aligns the assessment
to the learning objective and activities
(75% or greater alignment).
Assessments include some variety of
approaches (e.g. three instructional
strategies present) but with focus on
finding one “right” or “correct” answer
or solution. All pre/post/ formative
assessments provided.

Lessons address Blooms taxonomy with
primary focus on middle levels
(comprehension, application).
Planned activities may engage students
in critical or creative thinking and
problem solving and students are
provided 1-2 opportunities for input,
choice, or opinion.
Learners are presented with issues,
problems, or questions and explore
possible solutions, actions, or answers
and are provided 1-2 opportunities to
gather, organize, and evaluate
information and ideas from digital and
other resources.
Learners are provided opportunities to
demonstrate their understanding in
unique ways (e.g., invention, combining
ideas, model making, visual illustration,
metaphor).

Candidate uses 1-2 additional resources
beyond the textbook to prepare for the
lessons. No use of materials beyond
text-based resources.
Materials needed for lessons are listed
and an explanation is given for how
they support student learning (e.g.,
rationale explains 75% of assessments).
When technology is used, it is used to
support student learning (e.g.,
providing learners opportunity to apply
content knowledge).








Lesson plans follow logical sequence
with minor inconsistencies and follow
required format and include all
required elements
Candidate uses, designs, or adapts a
variety of classroom formative
assessments and aligns the assessment
to the learning objective and activities
(90% or greater alignment).
Assessments include a variety of
approaches (e.g., 3-4) with options for
more than one “right” or “correct”
answer or solution. All pre/post/
formative assessments and scoring
guides provided. Students given
opportunity to reflect on own work.
Lessons address mix of Blooms
taxonomy with primary focus on upper
levels (analysis, evaluation, synthesis).
Planned activities engage students in
critical or creative thinking and problem
solving and students are provided 3-4
opportunities for input, choice, or
opinion.
Learners are presented with issues,
problems, or questions of interest and
of real world relevance and explore
possible solutions, actions, or answers
and are provided 3-4 opportunities to
gather, organize, and evaluate
information and ideas from digital and
other resources.
Learners are provided opportunities to
demonstrate their understanding in
unique ways (e.g., invention, combining
ideas, model making, visual illustration,
metaphor). Learners present their work
to authentic audiences and purposes
Candidate uses 3-4 resources beyond
the textbook to prepare for the lessons
and to present activities. Materials
include non-text based resources.
Materials needed for lessons are listed
and an explanation is given for how
they support student learning (e.g.,
rationale explains 90% of assessments).
When technology is used, it is used to
support student learning (e.g.,
providing learners opportunity to
engage in inquiry/research









Candidate uses, designs, or adapts a
variety of classroom formative
assessments and fully aligns the
assessment to the learning objective
and activities
Assessments include a variety of
approaches (e.g., more than four) with
options for more than one “right” or
“correct” answer or solution. All
pre/post/ formative assessments and
scoring guides provided. Students given
opportunity to self-evaluate and reflect
on own work and/or give peers
feedback and/or create assessment
criteria.
Lessons address Blooms taxonomy with
primary focus on higher levels (analysis,
evaluation, synthesis).
Planned activities engage students in
critical or creative thinking and problem
solving. Students are provided more
than 4 opportunities for input, choice,
or opinion.
Learners asked to independently
identify issues, problems, or questions
of interest and of real world relevance
and explore possible solutions, actions,
or answers and are provided more than
4 opportunities to gather, organize, and
evaluate information and ideas from
digital and other resources and from
different perspectives.
Learners are provided opportunities to
demonstrate their understanding in
unique ways (e.g., invention, combining
ideas, model making, visual illustration,
metaphor) and explain their choices.
Candidate uses multiple resources (>4)
beyond the textbook to prepare for the
lessons and to present activities.
Materials include non-text based
resources.
Materials needed for lessons are listed
and an explanation is given for how all
materials support student learning.
When technology is used, it is used to
support student learning (e.g.,
providing learners opportunity to
engage in inquiry/research
(analysis/evaluation) and/or in the
(analysis/evaluation) and/or in the
creation/synthesis process)
creation/synthesis process) and/or to
expand options for learner choice)