ELEMENTARY EDUCATION K-5 & ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE K-5/5-8
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, AECI
Standards, and the
College of Education
Outcomes.
The connections made
between the elements of
the TWS, AECI
Standards, and the COE
Outcomes are minimal
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
AECI Standards, and
the COE Outcomes
are satisfactory.
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
AECI Standards, and
the College of
Education Outcomes
are clear.
The connections made between
the elements of the TWS, AECI
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
AECI Standard 1
1
Unacceptable
Offers no evidence that
the candidate has the
elementary student as
the focus.
2
Beginning
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate has the
elementary student as the
focus.
3
Developing
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has the
elementary student as
the focus.
4
Capable
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has the
elementary student as
the focus.
5
Accomplished
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate has the
elementary 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 the
concepts, principles,
theories and research
relevant to supporting
elementary students’
development, acquisition
of knowledge, and
motivation.
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate
understands the concepts,
principles, theories and
research relevant to
supporting elementary
students’ development,
acquisition of knowledge,
and motivation.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate understands
the concepts,
principles, theories and
research relevant to
supporting elementary
students’ development,
acquisition of
knowledge, and
motivation.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate understands
the concepts,
principles, theories and
research relevant to
supporting elementary
students’ development,
acquisition of
knowledge, and
motivation.
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate understands the
concepts, principles, theories
and research relevant to
supporting elementary students’
development, acquisition of
knowledge, and motivation.
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
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, or the
characteristics of the
characteristics of the
understanding of the
the characteristics of the
elementary classroom; nor
community, school, and the
community, school, and
characteristics of the
community, school, and
Knowledge of
how families, communities,
elementary classroom, and
elementary classroom,
community, school, and
elementary classroom with
Community,
and colleagues support and
minimally understands how
and has some
elementary classroom,
specific data, cited sources,
School and
promote elementary
families, communities, and
understanding of how
and has a good
and/or statistics. Candidate
Classroom
students’ learning.
colleagues support and
families, communities,
understanding of how
exhibits an excellent
Factors
promote elementary students’
and colleagues support
families, communities,
understanding of how
learning.
and promote elementary
and colleagues support
families, communities, and
students’ learning.
and promote learning.
colleagues support and
promote learning.
Displays no knowledge of
Displays minimal,
Displays general
Displays general and
Displays and explains inelementary student
stereotypical, or irrelevant
knowledge of elementary specific knowledge of
depth knowledge of
Knowledge of
differences (e.g.,
knowledge of elementary
student differences (e.g.,
elementary student
elementary student
Characteristics development, interests,
student differences (e.g.,
development, interests,
differences (e.g.,
differences (e.g.,
of Students
culture, abilities/disabilities).
development, interests,
culture,
development, interests,
development, interests,
culture, abilities/disabilities).
abilities/disabilities).
culture,
culture,
abilities/disabilities).
abilities/disabilities).
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.
Knowledge of
Students’
Skills and Prior
Learning
Implications
for
Instructional
Planning and
Assessment
Displays no knowledge of
elementary students’ skills
and previous learning and
does not indicate either is
important.
Identifies the value of
understanding of elementary
students’ skills and previous
learning but demonstrates its
importance for the whole class
only.
Identifies the value of
understanding of
elementary students’
skills and previous
learning for the group
and individuals.
Displays knowledge of
understanding of
elementary students’
skills and previous
learning, including
special needs students.
Articulates an in-depth
understanding of
elementary students’ skills
and previous learning for
the group and individuals
including special needs
students.
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.
Score
5.3
5.4
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.2
Learning Goals
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
1
2
3
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Goals are not in
Goals reflect only one
Goals reflect several
evidence.
type or level of learning
types or levels of
Significance, Challenge
learning but lack
and Variety
significance or challenge
Clarity
Goals are vague or not
in evidence.
No goals are presented
or inappropriate goals
and/or expectations have
been set for elementary
students.
Appropriateness for
Students
Alignment with
National, State or Local
Standards
Fails to develop goals
aligned with national, NJ
and COE standards
Goals are not stated
clearly and are activities
rather than learning
outcomes.
Goals are not
developmentally
appropriate for
elementary students,
don’t address prerequisite knowledge, and
skills, and do no provide
for critical thinking,
reflection, and problem
solving by elementary
students.
Goals are not aligned
with national, NJ
standards or COE
standards.
Some of the goals are
clearly stated as learning
outcomes.
Some goals are
developmentally
appropriate for
elementary students,
address some prerequisite knowledge, and
skills, in addition to
providing for some
critical thinking,
reflection, and problem
solving by elementary
students.
Some goals are aligned
with national, NJ 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 for
elementary students,
address pre-requisite
knowledge, and skills, in
addition to providing for
adequate critical thinking
reflection, and problem
solving by elementary
students.
Goals demonstrate
realistic expectations for
all elementary students;
in addition to providing
for elementary students’
critical thinking, reflection
and problem solving.
Most of the goals are
explicitly aligned with
national, NJ and COE
standards.
Goals are aligned with
national, NJ, COE
standards and are
articulated through the
lesson presentations.
Alignments are
explained.
Score
3.3
3.3
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
Technical
Soundness
Adaptations
Based on the
Individual
Needs of
Students
1
Unacceptable
Minimal plans for pre and
post assessments
provided; assessments do
not measure learning goals.
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 no
criteria for measuring
elementary student
performance relative to
learning goals.
Assessments contain
poor criteria for
measuring elementary
student performance
relative to learning
goals.
The assessment plan
includes only one
assessment mode and
does not assess
elementary students
before, during, and after
instruction. Limited
knowledge of formal
and informal
assessments
Assessments are not
valid; scoring
procedures are
inaccurate; items are
poorly written; directions
are confusing
Teacher does not adapt
assessments to meet
the development of
each elementary
student’s individual
needs.
Assessment criteria have been
developed for measuring
elementary student performance,
but they are not clear or are not
explicitly linked to learning goals.
The assessment plan fails to
demonstrate evidence of
elementary student
assessment other than after
instructions. No knowledge
of formal/informal
assessments
Assessments are not
designed to measure
lessons goals and
objectives; scoring
procedures are inaccurate.
Teacher does not attempt to
address or link assessments
to the development of each
elementary student’s needs.
4
Capable
Each of the learning goals is
assessed by the assessment
plan; assessments are
congruent with the learning
goals in content and cognitive
complexity.
Assessment criteria are clear,
measuring elementary student
performance, and are explicitly
linked to the learning goals.
5
Accomplished
All learning goals are
assessed by the
assessment plan, and
provide students with
constructive feedback on
their learning.
Assessment criteria are
linked to learning goals;
accurately documenting
elementary student
learning.
The assessment plan includes
multiple modes but are either
pencil/paper based (not
performance based) and/or do
not require the integration of
knowledge, skills and critical
thinking for elementary students.
Some knowledge of formal and
informal assessments.
The assessment plan includes
multiple assessment modes
(performance assessments)
and assesses elementary
student performance
throughout the instructional
sequence. Good knowledge of
formal and informal
assessment.
The assessment plan
uses formal/informal
assessments and
student’s selfassessments to assess
elementary student
performance and to plan,
evaluate and strengthen
instruction.
Assessments appear to have
some validity. Some scoring
procedures are explained; some
items or prompts are clearly
written; some directions and
procedures are clear.
Teacher makes adaptations to
assessments that are
appropriate to meet the
development of some elementary
student’s individual needs.
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
development of most
elementary student’s individual
need.
Assessments are valid
and clearly. Data was
used to document
students’ strengths and
opportunities for learning.
Teacher’s adaptations to
assessments meet the
development of all
elementary students’
individual needs and are
creative and show
problem-solving skills.
Sco
4.0
4.0
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 lesson
Few lessons include
Most lessons include
All lessons include
All lessons include
includes
integrated curricular
integrated curricular
integrated curricular
integrated curricular
integrated
(learning) goals. Few
(learning) goals. Most
(learning) goals. All
(learning) goals,
curricular
learning activities,
learning activities,
learning activities,
demonstrating critical
Alignment with
(learning) goals.
assignments and
assignments and
assignments and
thinking and reflection
Curricular
No learning
resources are aligned with
resources are aligned
resources are aligned
in activities and
Learning Goals
activities are
curricular (learning) goals.
with curricular (learning)
with curricular (learning)
assignments.
aligned to learning Not all curricular (learning)
goals. Most curricular
goals. All curricular
goals.
goals are covered in the
(learning) goals are
(learning) goals are
design.
covered in the design.
covered in the design.
Teacher does not
Teacher provides few
Teacher provides some
Teacher provides
Teacher provides
attempt to provide connections across
connections across
adequate connections
significant connections
any connections
curriculum and content
curriculum and content
across curriculum and
across curriculum and
across content
areas for elementary
areas for elementary
content areas for
content areas for
Accurate
areas for
students. The use of
students. The use of
elementary students.
elementary student
Representation
elementary
content appears to contain
content appears to be
The use of content
learning, stressing
of Content
students, and
numerous inaccuracies.
mostly accurate. Shows
appears to be accurate.
depth and breadth of
Across
does not
Content seems to be
some awareness of the
Focus of the content is
content.
Curriculum
demonstrate
viewed more as isolated
big ideas or structure of
congruent with the big
purpose and
skills and facts rather than
the discipline.
ideas or structure of the
relevancy of
as part of a larger
discipline.
content.
conceptual structure.
The lessons within The lessons within the unit
The lessons within the
Most lessons within the
All lessons within the
the unit do not
are not logically organized
unit have some logical
unit are logically
unit demonstrate how
demonstrate
(e.g., sequenced).
organization and appear
organized and appear to
knowledge of content
Lesson and Unit knowledge of how
to be somewhat useful in be useful in moving
is created and
Structure
content is created
moving students toward
students toward
organized and
and developed.
achieving the learning
achieving the learning
integrate knowledge
goals.
goals.
from other fields of
content.
Use of a Variety
A single,
Little variety of instruction,
Some variety in
Significant variety across
All instructional
of Instruction,
instructional
activities, assignments,
instruction, activities,
instruction, activities,
strategic assignments
Activities,
modality is used
and resources. Heavy
assignments, or
assignments, and/or
are varied and include
Assignments
with textbook as
reliance on textbook or
resources, but with
resources. This variety
multiple opportunities
and Resources
only reference.
single resource (e.g., work
limited opportunities for
includes many
for elementary
Score
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.4
No attempt made
to consider social
interaction or
active
engagement of
learners to
accommodate
individual learner
needs
sheets). No opportunities
for elementary students to
engage in positive social
interaction or actively
engage in lessons to
accommodate individual
learner needs.
elementary students to
engage in positive social
interaction and active
engagement in lessons.
Some attention paid to
individual needs.
opportunities for
elementary students to
engage in positive social
interaction and active
engagement in lessons
to accommodate most
learner needs.
students to engage in
positive social
interaction and active
engagement to
accommodate for
individual learner
needs and to achieve
lesson goals.
3.2
Use of
Contextual
Information and
Data to Select
Appropriate and
Relevant
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
Use of
Technology
Instruction has not
been based upon
knowledge of
subject matter,
students or preassessment data.
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.
Teacher does not
use technology
during instruction.
Technology is
inappropriately used and
inappropriate rationale is
provided.
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.
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.
All instruction
addresses the diverse
needs of individual
students and
contextual factors of
community, school and
the elementary 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 elementary
student, content,
and community.
Teacher treats
elementary 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 elementary student
learning).
Limited modifications of
the instructional plan have
been made, to
accommodate individual
elementary learners.
Some modifications of the
instructional plan are
made to address
individual elementary
student needs, but these
are not based on the
analysis of student
learning, best practice, or
contextual factors.
Appropriate modifications of
the instructional plan are
made to address individual
student needs. These
modifications are informed
by the analysis of
elementary student
learning/performance, best
practice, or contextual
factors.
Inappropriate
modification in
instruction.
Modifications in instruction
lack congruence with
learning goals.
Modifications in
instruction are somewhat
congruent with learning
goals.
Modifications in instruction
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 is
provided.
Modifications in
instruction are
congruent with
learning goals and
cites current
research as the
rationale for the
modifications.
Score
5.1
3.2
3.2
1.0
5.1
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.
No remediation is
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
learning goals. Limited
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
goal. Remediation is
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
assessment of student
gains.
A thorough analysis of
the learning gains of all
students and subgroups
is presented.
Remediation is specific.
Score
provided.
remediation is provided.
Reflection and Self-Evaluation
Rubric
specific.
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
Score
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.
No attempt is made to Attempt is made to
Reflects on practice by
Reflects on practice by
Reflects, in depth, on
reflect on practice.
reflect on practice, but
identifying successful and
identifying successful
practice, extensively
No evaluation of the
fails to evaluate the
unsuccessful practices or
and unsuccessful
evaluating the effects
effects professional
effects professional
assessments and
activities and
professional decisions
decisions have on
decisions have on
superficially evaluating the assessments,
have on student
5.2
Insights on
student learning is
student learning.
effects professional
evaluating the effects
learning. Current
Effective
present. Provides no
Rationale describing
decisions have on student professional decisions
research on teaching is
Instruction and
rationale for why
purpose of activities or
learning (no use of theory
have on student
incorporated as
Assessment
some activities or
assessments is
or research).
learning by providing
supportive
assessments were
confusing; insights
plausible reasons
documentation.
more successful than
limited to knowledge(based on theory or
others.
based instruction and
research) for their
use of formal
success or lack
assessments.
thereof.
Does not connect
Connections among
Connects learning goals,
Logically connects
Connects learning goals,
learning goals,
learning goals,
instructions, and
learning goals,
instruction and
instruction, and
instructions and
assessment results in the
instruction, and
assessment results in
Alignment
assessment results in assessments are
discussion of student
assessment results in
the discussion of student
Among Goals,
the discussion of
irrelevant or inaccurate. learning and effective
the discussion of
learning and effective
Instruction and
student learning and
instruction, but
student learning and
instruction. Current
Assessment
effective instruction
misunderstandings or
effective instruction.
research findings are
and/or the
conceptual gaps are
incorporated as
connections are
present.
supportive
irrelevant or
documentation.
inaccurate.
Implications for
Future Teaching
Implications for
Professional
Development
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 ideas for
redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment and
explains why these
modifications 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 or evidence of
future use of
resources available
for professional
learning or related to
the education of
elementary students.
Provides goals that are
not related to the
insights and
experiences described
in this section. Little
evidence of future use
of resources available
for professional
development related to
the education of
elementary students.
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 a commitment to use
resources available for
professional development
related to the education of
elementary students.
Presents professional
learning goals that
emerge from the
insights and
experiences described
in this section.
Describes at least one
specific step to meet
these goals and a
commitment to use
resources available for
professional
development related to
the education of
elementary students.
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
resources available for
professional
development related to
the education of
elementary students.
5.2