INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO
RUBRIC
Trait
Introduction to Portfolio
1
Unacceptable
Does not define the
purpose of the portfolio.
2
Beginning
Vaguely defines the
purpose of the portfolio.
3
Developing
Adequately defines
the purpose of the
portfolio.
4
Capable
Clearly and
accurately delineates
the purpose of the
portfolio.
5
Accomplished
Defines the purpose of the TWS
portfolio in a professional and
articulate manner.
There is no description (or
a very poor one) of the
learning outcomes
selected.
There is a brief
description of outcomes,
but the number is less
than required.
There is an
acceptable
description of learning
outcomes.
There is a specific
description of the
learning outcomes.
There is an exemplary
description of the outcomes.
There are no connections
made between the TWS
elements, State and
NAEYC Standards, and
the College of Education
Outcomes.
The connections made
between the elements of
the TWS, State and
NAEYC Standards, and
the COE Outcomes are
minimal
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
State and NAEYC
Standards, and the
COE Outcomes are
satisfactory.
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
State and NAEYC
Standards, and the
College of Education
Outcomes are clear.
The connections made between
the elements of the TWS, State
and NAEYC Standards, and the
COE Outcomes are clear and
focused.
There is no description of
the TWS portfolio
organization.
The description of the
organization of the TWS
portfolio is vague and not
easily understood.
The description of the
TWS portfolio
organization is
acceptable.
The description of the
TWS portfolio
organization is logical
and in an easy to
understand format.
The description of the
organization is excellent, well
thought out, and logical.
PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT
RUBRIC
Trait
Philosophy Statement
1
Unacceptable
Offers no evidence that
the candidate has the P3 student as the focus.
2
Beginning
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate has the
P-3 student as the focus.
3
Developing
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has the P-3
student as the focus.
4
Capable
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has the P-3
student as the focus.
5
Accomplished
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate has the P-3
student as the focus.
Offers no evidence that
the SPECTRUM model
is the framework
Offers minimal evidence
that the SPECTRUM
model is the framework.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
SPECTRUM model is
the framework.
Offers significant
evidence that the
SPECTRUM model is
the framework.
Offers superior evidence that
the SPECTRUM model is the
framework.
Offers no evidence that
the candidate
understands theory and
research relevant to
early childhood.
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate
understands theory and
research relevant to early
childhood.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate understands
theory and research
relevant to early
childhood.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate understands
theory and research
relevant to early
childhood.
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate understands
theory and research relevant to
early childhood.
Offers no evidence that
the candidate has gained
insight into teaching and
learning through field
experiences and
coursework.
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and learning
through field experiences
and coursework.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has gained
insight into teaching
and learning through
field experiences and
coursework.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has gained
insight into teaching
and learning through
field experiences and
coursework.
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate has gained
insight into teaching and
learning through field
experiences and coursework.
Writing Mechanics and Organization
Rubric
Standard: TWS Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct and written in standard English.
Trait
1
Unacceptable
2
Beginning
3
Developing
4
Capable
5
Accomplished
Writing Mechanics
The use of standard
written English is
unsatisfactory at this level.
More than 10 errors in
punctuation, capitalization,
subject-verb agreement
may exist or excessive
fragments or run-ons may
detract from the overall
content of the writing.
The use of standard
written English needs
attention. More than 9
errors in punctuation,
capitalization, subjectverb agreement may
exist or 2 or more
fragments or run-ons
may exist.
The use of standard
written English is
adequate with no more
than 8 errors in
punctuation,
capitalization, subjectverb agreement may
exist or 1 or more
fragments or run-ons
may exist.
The use of standard
written English is good
with no more than 5
errors.
The use of standard written
English is outstanding with
no more than 2 errors in
punctuation, capitalization,
subject-verb agreement
may exist. No fragments or
run-ons may exist
Syntax
Syntax and word choice
may be unsatisfactory, or
the writing may lack
cohesion.
Syntax and word choice
may need attention, or
the writing may lack
cohesion.
Syntax and word choice
are satisfactory, and the
writing is cohesive.
Syntax and word
choice are appropriate,
and the writing is
cohesive.
Syntax and word choice
are clearly superior, and
the writing is very cohesive.
Contextual Factors Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses information about the learning/teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals, plan instruction and
assess learning.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Score
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
Displays no knowledge of
Displays minimal, irrelevant, or Displays some
Displays a
Displays and explains an
the characteristics of the
biased knowledge of the
knowledge of the
comprehensive
in-depth understanding of
community, school, and
characteristics of the
characteristics of the
understanding of the
the characteristics of the
classroom; nor understands
community, school, and
community, school, and
characteristics of the
community, school, and
Knowledge of
and values the importance
classroom and minimal
classroom that may
community, school, and
classroom that may affect
Community,
and complex characteristics
understanding and value of the affect learning and some
classroom that may
learning with specific data,
School and
of children’s families and
importance and complex
understanding and value
affect learning and a
cited sources, and/or
Classroom
communities.
characteristics of children’s
of the importance and
good understanding and
statistics. Candidate also
Factors
families and communities..
complex characteristics
value of the importance
clearly understands, and
of children’s families and
and complex
values the importance and
communities..
characteristics of
complex characteristics of
children’s families and
children’s families and
communities..
communities.
Displays no understanding
Displays minimal,
Displays general
Displays general and
Displays and explains inof young children’s
stereotypical, or irrelevant
understanding of young
specific knowledge of
depth understanding of
characteristics and needs,
understanding of young
children’s characteristics
understanding of young
young children’s
and of multiple interacting
children’s characteristics and
and needs, and of
children’s characteristics
characteristics and needs,
influences on children’s
needs, and of multiple
multiple interacting
and needs, and of
and of multiple interacting
development and learning,
interacting influences on
influences on children’s
multiple interacting
influences on children’s
Knowledge of
to create environments that
children’s development and
development and
influences on children’s
development and learning,
Characteristics
are healthy, respectful,
learning, to create
learning, to create
development and
to create environments that
of Students
supportive, and challenging
environments that are healthy,
environments that are
learning, to create
are healthy, respectful,
for all children.
respectful, supportive, and
healthy, respectful,
environments that are
supportive, and challenging
challenging for all children.
supportive, and
healthy, respectful,
for all children.
challenging for all
supportive, and
children.
challenging for all
children.
Fails to demonstrate
Demonstrates general
Demonstrates general
Articulates an
Articulates general and
Knowledge of
understanding of a variety of understanding of a variety of
understanding of a
understanding of varied
specific understanding of
Students’
approaches to learning
approaches to learning among
variety of approaches to
learning modalities and
varied learning modalities
Varied
among students, e.g.,
students and may know one or learning among students
multiple intelligences.
and multiple intelligences.
Approaches to multiple intelligences and/or
two learning modalities but not and can distinguish
Learning
learning modalities.
a variety.
between multiple
modalities.
Displays no knowledge of
Identifies the value of
Identifies the value of
Displays knowledge of
Articulates an in-depth
students’ skills and previous
understanding students’ skills
understanding students’
understanding students’
understanding of students’
learning and does not
and previous learning but
skills and previous
skills and previous
skills and previous learning
Knowledge of
indicate either is important.
demonstrates its importance
learning for the group
learning, including
for the group and
Students’
Does not indicate that
for the whole class,only, not
and individuals
special needs students
individuals including special
Skills and Prior
understanding of young
recognizing the importance of
demonstrating an
with a clear
needs students with an inLearning
children’s characteristics
understanding individual
understanding of young
understanding of young
depth understanding of
and needs is essential.
children’s characteristics and
children’s characteristics
children’s characteristics
young children’s
needs,.
and needs.
and needs.
characteristics and needs.
Implications
for
Instructional
Planning and
Assessment
Does not provide
implications for instruction
and assessment based on
student individual
differences and community,
school, and classroom
characteristics or provides
inappropriate implications.
Provides minimal implications
for instruction and assessment
based on student individual
differences and community,
school, and classroom
characteristics or provides
inappropriate implications.
Provides general
implications for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school, or
classroom
characteristics.
Provides specific
implications for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school, and
classroom
characteristics.
Provides specific
implications and analyzes
decisions for instruction
and assessment based on
student individual
differences (ELL and
inclusion students) and
community, school, and
classroom characteristics.
Learning Goals
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Significance, Challenge
and Variety
Clarity
Appropriateness for
Students
Alignment with
National, State or Local
Standards
1
Unacceptable
Goals are not in
evidence.
2
Beginning
Goals reflect only one
type or level of learning
3
Developing
Goals reflect several
types or levels of
learning but lack
significance or challenge
Goals are vague or not in
evidence.
Goals are not stated
clearly and are activities
rather than learning
outcomes.
Goals are not
developmentally
appropriate; nor address
pre-requisite knowledge,
skills, experiences, or
other student needs.
Some of the goals are
clearly stated as learning
outcomes.
Goals presented are
inappropriate for the
class or set unrealistic
expectations for
students.
Fails to develop goals
aligned with NAEYC,
state and COE standards
Goals are not aligned
with NAEYC, NJ
standards or COE
standards.
Some goals are
developmentally
appropriate and address
some pre-requisite
knowledge, skills,
experiences, and other
student needs.
Some goals are aligned
with NAEYC, state or
COE standards.
4
Capable
Goals reflect several
types or levels of
learning and are
significant and
challenging.
Most of the goals are
clearly stated as learning
outcomes
5
Accomplished
Goals are significant and
challenge thought and
expectations including
three or more levels and
types.
Goals are clearly stated
in behavioral terms.
Most goals are
developmentally
appropriate; addresses
pre-requisite knowledge,
skills, experiences and
other student needs are
considered.
Most of the goals are
explicitly aligned with
NAEYC, state and COE
standards.
Goals demonstrates
realistic expectations for
all students in addition to
providing for students’
critical thinking and
reflection.
Goals are aligned with
NAEYC, state, COE
standards and are
articulated through the
lesson presentations.
Alignments are
explained.
Score
Assessment Plan
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Alignment with
Learning Goals
and Instruction
Clarity of Criteria
and Standards for
Performance
Multiple Modes
and Approaches
1
Unacceptable
Minimal plans for pre
and post
assessments are
provided;
assessments do not
measure learning
goals.
The assessments
contain no criteria for
measuring student
performance relative
to the learning goals
nor provide for use of
systematic
observations,
documentation, and
other effective
assessment
strategies in a
responsible way, in
partnership with
families and other
professionals, to
positively influence
children’s
development and
learning.
The assessment plan
fails to demonstrate
evidence of student
assessment other
than after
instructions. Limited
knowledge of
2
Beginning
Content and methods of
assessment lack
congruence with learning
goals or lack cognitive
complexity.
3
Developing
Some of the learning goals are
assess through the assessment
plan, but many are not congruent
with learning goals in content and
cognitive complexity.
Assessments contain
poorly stated criteria for
measuring student
performance leading to
student confusion. No
use of systematic
observations,
documentation, and other
effective assessment
strategies in a responsible
way, in partnership with
families and other
professionals, to positively
influence children’s
development and learning.
Assessment criteria have been
developed, but they are not clear
or are not explicitly linked to the
learning goals. Some use of use
systematic observations,
documentation, and other
assessment strategies responsibly
in partnership with families and
other professionals, to positively
influence children’s development
and learning.
The assessment plan
includes only one
assessment mode and
does not assess students
before, during, and after
instruction.
The assessment plan includes
multiple modes but all are either
pencil/paper based (i.e., they are
not performance assessments)
and/or do not require the
integration of knowledge, skills
and critical thinking.
4
Capable
Each of the learning goals is
assessed through the
assessment plan;
assessments are congruent
with the learning goals in
content and cognitive
complexity.
Assessment criteria are clear
and are explicitly linked to the
learning goals. Good use of
systematic observations,
documentation, and other
effective assessment
strategies in a responsible
way, in partnership with
families and other
professionals, to positively
influence children’s
development and learning.
5
Accomplished
All learning goals are
assessed by the
assessment plan, and
provide students with
constructive feedback
on their learning.
The assessment plan
includes multiple assessment
modes (including
performance assessments,
lab reports, research projects,
etc.) and assesses student
performance throughout the
The assessment plan
uses formal/informal
assessments and
student’s selfassessments to assess
student performance
and effectiveness of the
Assessment criteria are
linked to learning goals;
accurately documenting
student learning.
Consisitent use of
systematic
observations,
documentation, and
other effective
assessment strategies
in a responsible way, in
partnership with families
and other professionals,
to positively influence
children’s development
and learning.
Score
Technical
Soundness
Adaptations
Based on the
Individual Needs
of Students
formal/informal
assessments
Assessments are not
designed to measure
lessons goals and
objectives; scoring
procedures are
inaccurate.
Teacher does not
address or link
assessments to
identified contextual
factors.
Assessments are not
valid; scoring procedures
are inaccurate; items or
prompts are poorly
written; directions and
procedures are confusing
to students.
Teacher does not adapt
assessments to meet the
individual needs of
students or these
assessments are
inappropriate.
instructional sequence.
instructional sequence.
Assessments appear to have
some validity. Some scoring
procedures are explained; some
items or prompts are clearly
written; some directions and
procedures are clear to students
Assessments appear to be
valid; scoring procedures are
explained; most items or
prompts are clearly written;
directions and procedures are
clear to students.
Teacher makes adaptations to
assessments that are appropriate
to meet the individual needs of
some students.
Teacher makes adaptations
to assessments that are
appropriate to meet the
individual needs of most
students.
Assessments appear to
be valid and clearly
written. Assessments
data used to document
students’ strengths as
well as opportunities for
learning.
Teacher’s adaptations
of assessments for all
students needs to be
met. Adaptations are
creative and show
evidence of outstanding
problem-solving skills
by teacher candidate.
Design for Instruction
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
No
Few lessons/activities are
Most lessons/activities
All lessons/activities are
All lessons/activities
lessons/activities
explicitly linked to learning
are explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
are explicitly linked to
are linked to
goals. Few learning
learning goals. Most
learning goals. All
learning goals,
learning goal. No
activities, assignments and learning activities,
learning activities,
demonstrating critical
Alignment with
learning activities
resources are aligned with
assignments and
assignments and
thinking and reflection
Learning Goals
are aligned to
learning goals. Not all
resources are aligned
resources are aligned
in activities and
learning goals.
learning goals are covered
with learning goals. Most with learning goals. All
assignments.
in the design.
learning goals are
learning goals are
covered in the design.
covered in the design.
Teacher does not
Teacher’s use of content
Teacher’s use of content
Teacher’s use of content
Teacher provides
demonstrate
appears to contain
appears to be mostly
appears to be accurate.
cross-content
Accurate
purpose and
numerous inaccuracies.
accurate. Shows some
Focus of the content is
approach to student
Representation
relevancy of
Content seems to be
awareness of the big
congruent with the big
learning, stressing
of Content
content.
viewed more as isolated
ideas or structure of the
ideas or structure of the
depth and breadth of
skills and facts rather than
discipline.
discipline.
content.
Score
Lesson and Unit
Structure
Use of a Variety
of Instruction,
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
Use of
Contextual
Information and
Data to Select
Appropriate and
Relevant
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
Use of
Technology
The lessons within
the unit do not
demonstrate
knowledge of how
content is created
and developed.
A single,
instructional
modality is used
with textbook as
only reference.
Instruction has not
been based upon
knowledge of
subject matter,
students or preassessment data.
Teacher does not
use technology
during instruction.
as part of a larger
conceptual structure.
The lessons within the unit
are not logically organized
(e.g., sequenced).
Little variety of instruction,
activities, assignments,
and resources. Heavy
reliance on textbook or
single resource (e.g., work
sheets).
Instruction has been
designed with very limited
reference to contextual
factors and preassessment data.
Activities and assignments
do not appear productive
and appropriate for each
student.
Technology is
inappropriately used and
inappropriate rationale is
provided.
The lessons within the
unit have some logical
organization and appear
to be somewhat useful in
moving students toward
achieving the learning
goals.
Most lessons within the
unit are logically
organized and appear to
be useful in moving
students toward
achieving the learning
goals.
Some variety in
instruction, activities,
assignments, or
resources but with limited
contribution to learning.
Significant variety across
instruction, activities,
assignments, and/or
resources. This variety
makes a clear
contribution to learning.
Most instruction has
been designed with
reference to contextual
factors and preassessment data. Most
activities and
assignments appear
productive and
appropriate for each
student.
Teacher integrates
appropriate technology
that makes a significant
contribution to teaching
and learning or provides
a strong rationale for not
using technology.
Some instruction has
been designed with
reference to contextual
factors and preassessment data. Some
activities and
assignments appear
productive and
appropriate for each
student.
Teacher uses technology
but it does not make a
significant contribution to
teaching and learning or
teacher provides limited
rationale for not using
technology.
All lessons within the
unit demonstrate how
knowledge of content
is created and
organized and
integrates knowledge
from other fields of
content.
Instructional strategic
assignments are varied
to accommodate
individual learners and
to achieve lesson
goals.
All instruction
addresses the diverse
needs of individual
students and
contextual factors of
community, school and
class.
Teacher integrates a
variety of media and
technology into
instruction and relates
both directly to lesson
goals.
Instructional Decision-Making
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses on-going analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Sound
Professional
Practice
Modifications
Based on
Analysis of
Student Learning
Congruence
Between
Modifications and
Learning Goals
1
Unacceptable
Instructional
decisions are
inappropriate for
age of student,
content, and
community.
Teacher treats
class as “one plan
fits all” with no
modifications.
Fails to
demonstrate
evidence of
instructional
modifications.
2
Beginning
Many instructional
decisions are
inappropriate and not
pedagogically sound.
3
Developing
Instructional decisions are
mostly appropriate, but
some decisions are not
pedagogically sound.
4
Capable
Most instructional decisions
are pedagogically sound
(i.e., they are likely to lead
to student learning).
Limited modifications of
the instructional plan have
been made, to
accommodate individual
learners.
Inappropriate
modification in
instruction and
environment.
Modifications in instruction
and environment lack
congruence with learning
goals.
Some modifications of the
instructional plan are
made to address
individual student needs
and interests, but these
are not based on the
analysis of student
learning or development,
best practice, or
contextual factors.
Modifications in
instruction and
environment are
somewhat congruent with
learning goals.
Appropriate modifications of
the instructional plan are
made to address individual
student needs and
interests. These
modifications are informed
by the analysis of student
learning/performance,
development, best practice,
or contextual factors.
Modifications in instruction
and environment are
congruent with learning
goals.
5
Accomplished
Most instructional
decisions are
pedagogically
sound and build on
concepts and skills
previously learned.
Appropriate
modifications of the
plan are made to
individualize
instruction.
Rational to improve
student progress
and development is
provided.
Modifications in
instruction and
environment are
congruent with
learning goals and
cites current
research as the
rationale for the
modifications.
Score
Analysis of Student Learning
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Clarity and
accuracy of
Presentation
Alignment with
Learning
Goals
1
Unacceptable
Presentation does not
include data.
2
Beginning
Presentation is not
clear and accurate; it
does not accurately
reflect the data.
3
Developing
Presentation is
understandable and
contains few errors.
4
Capable
Presentation is easy to
understand and
contains no errors of
presentation.
Neither analysis of
student learning nor
visual representation is
aligned with learning
goals.
Analysis of student
learning is aligned with
learning goals. Visual
representations do not
include whole class,
sub-groups or individual
students.
Analysis is fully aligned
with learning goals and
provides a
comprehensive profile
of student learning for
the whole class,
subgroups, and two
individuals.
Interpretation is
unsupported by data
Interpretation is
inaccurate, and
conclusions are
missing.
Analysis of student
learning is general with
learning goals and/or
fails to provide a
comprehensive profile
of student learning
relative to the goals for
the whole class,
subgroups, and two
individuals.
Interpretation is
technically accurate,
but conclusions are
missing or not fully
supported by data.
Analysis is weak and fails
to provide subgroup
achievement
Analysis of student
learning fails to include
evidence of impact on
student learning in
terms of numbers of
students who achieved
and made progress
toward learning goals.
Analysis of student
learning includes
incomplete evidence of
the impact on student
learning in terms of
numbers of students
who achieved and
made progress toward
Analysis of student
learning includes
evidence of the impact
on student learning in
terms of number of
students who achieved
and made progress
toward each learning
Interpretation
of Data
Evidence of
Impact on
Student
Learning
Interpretation is
meaningful, and
appropriate conclusions
are drawn from the
data.
5
Accomplished
Contains no errors of
presentation.
Presentation is
communicated with the
use of technology and
media.
Analysis is thorough and
complete, recognizing
student progress in
developing content
proficiency. Visual and
narrative summaries
demonstrate the extent
of student progress.
Interpretation is
comprehensive.
Appropriate conclusions
are drawn from the data.
Candidate has detailed
the assessment and
evaluation of student
gains.
A thorough analysis of
the learning gains of all
students and subgroups
is presented.
Remediation is specific.
Score
No remediation is
provided.
learning goals. Limited
remediation is provided.
goal. Remediation is
specific.
Reflection and Self-Evaluation
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher analyzes the relationship between his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
No evidence or
Provides one possible
Provides evidence but
Uses evidence to
Uses evidence to
reasons provided to
reason as evidence to
simplistic, superficial
support conclusions
support more than four
support conclusions
support conclusions
reasons are given or
drawn in “Analysis of
conclusions drawn in
drawn in “Analysis of
drawn in Analysis of
hypotheses to support
Student Learning”
“Analysis of Student
Interpretation of
Student Learning”
Student Learning.
conclusions drawn in
section.
Learning” section.
Student
section.
“Analysis of Student
Explores multiple
Learning
Learning” section.
hypotheses for why
some students did and
others did not meet
learning goals.
Provides no rationale
Rationale for activities
Identifies successful and
Identifies successful
Reflects on own
for why some
or assessments
unsuccessful activities or
and unsuccessful
performance as a
activities or
presented in confusing
assessments and
activities and
teacher focusing on the
assessments were
manner; insights limited superficially explores
assessments and
impact of the experience
more successful than
to knowledge-based
reasons for their success
provides plausible
on student learning.
others. No evidence
instruction and use of
or lack thereof (no use of
reasons (based on
Current research
that candidate is a
formal assessments.
theory or research).
theory or research) for
findings are incorporated
continuous,
Little evidence that
There is evidence that
their success or lack
as supportive
Insights on
collaborative learner
candidate is a
candidate is a continuous, thereof. There is good
documentation. There is
Effective
who demonstrates
continuous,
collaborative learner who
evidence that candidate strong evidence that
Instruction and
knowledgeable,
collaborative learner
demonstrates
is a continuous,
candidate is a
Assessment
reflective, and critical
who demonstrates
knowledgeable, reflective, collaborative learner
continuous, collaborative
perspectives making
knowledgeable,
and critical perspectives
who demonstrates
learner who
informed decisions
reflective, and critical
making informed
knowledgeable,
demonstrates
that integrate
perspectives making
decisions that integrate
reflective, and critical
knowledgeable,
knowledge from a
informed decisions that
knowledge from a variety
perspectives making
reflective, and critical
variety of sources.
integrate knowledge
of sources.
informed decisions that
perspectives making
from a variety of
integrate knowledge
informed decisions that
sources.
from a variety of
integrate knowledge
sources.
from a variety of
Score
sources.
Alignment
Among Goals,
Instruction and
Assessment
Implications for
Future Teaching
Implications for
Professional
Development
Does not connect
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment results in
the discussion of
student learning and
effective instruction
and/or the
connections are
irrelevant or
inaccurate.
Connections among
learning goals,
instructions and
assessments are
irrelevant or inaccurate.
Connects learning goals,
instructions, and
assessment results in the
discussion of student
learning and effective
instruction, but
misunderstandings or
conceptual gaps are
present.
Logically connects
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment results in
the discussion of
student learning and
effective instruction.
Connects learning goals,
instruction and
assessment results in
the discussion of student
learning and effective
instruction. Current
research findings are
incorporated as
supportive
documentation.
Provides no ideas or
inappropriate ideas
for redesigning
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment.
Provides limited ideas
for redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment. Rationale
is inadequate; or
absent.
Provides ideas for
redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment but offers no
rationale for why these
changes would improve
student learning.
Provides a repertoire of
strategies, offering
specific alternative
actions complete with
probable successes for
student learning.
Provides no
professional learning
goals nor evidence
that there will be use
of ethical guidelines
and other
professional
standards related to
early childhood
practice
Provides goals that are
not related to the
insights and
experiences described
in this section. Little
evidence of future use
of ethical guidelines
and other professional
standards related to
early childhood practice
Presents professional
learning goals that are not
strongly related to the
insights and experiences
described in this section
and/or provides a vague
plan for meeting the goals
and future use of ethical
guidelines and other
professional standards
related to early childhood
practice
Provides ideas for
redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment and
explains why these
modifications would
improve student
learning.
Presents professional
learning goals that
emerge from the
insights and
experiences descried in
this section. Strong
Likelihood of use of
ethical guidelines and
other professional
standards related to
early childhood practice
Presents four or more
professional learning
goals that clearly
emerge from the insights
and experiences
described in this section.
Describes at least two
specific steps to meet
these goals and a
commitment to use of
ethical guidelines and
other professional
standards related to
early childhood practice