SPECIAL EDUCATION
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, CEC
Standards, and the
College of Education
Outcomes.
The connections made
between the elements of
the TWS, CEC
Standards, and the COE
Outcomes are minimal
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
CEC Standards, and
the COE Outcomes
are satisfactory.
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS,
CEC Standards, and
the College of
Education Outcomes
are clear.
The connections made between
the elements of the TWS, CEC
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
ELN student as the
focus.
2
Beginning
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate has the
ELN student as the focus.
3
Developing
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has the ELN
student as the focus.
4
Capable
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has the ELN
student as the focus.
5
Accomplished
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate has the ELN
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
special education.
Offers minimal evidence
that the candidate
understands theory and
research relevant to
special education.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate understands
theory and research
relevant to special
education.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate understands
theory and research
relevant to special
education.
Offers superior evidence that
the candidate understands
theory and research relevant to
special education.
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 values the
affect learning and some
classroom that may
learning with specific data,
School and
of ELN families.
importance and complex
understanding and value
affect learning and a
cited sources, and/or
Classroom
characteristics of ELN families. of the importance and
good understanding and
statistics. Candidate
Factors
complex characteristics
value of the importance
understands and values the
of ELN families.
and complex
importance and complex
characteristics of ELN
characteristics of ELN
families. .
families.
Displays no knowledge of
Displays minimal,
Displays general
Displays general and
Displays and explains inELN student differences
stereotypical, or irrelevant
knowledge of ELN
specific knowledge of
depth knowledge of ELN
Knowledge of
(e.g., development,
knowledge of ELN student
student differences (e.g.,
ELN student differences
student differences (e.g.,
Characteristics
interests, culture,
differences (e.g., development, development, interests,
(e.g., development,
development, interests,
of Students
abilities/disabilities).
interests, culture,
culture,
interests, culture,
culture,
abilities/disabilities).
abilities/disabilities).
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
ELN students’ skills and
previous learning and does
not indicate either is
important.
Does not provide
implications for instruction
and assessment based on
student individual
differences and community,
school, and classroom
characteristics or provides
inappropriate implications.
Identifies the value of
understanding of ELN
students’ skills and previous
learning but demonstrates its
importance for the whole class
only.
Provides minimal implications
for instruction and assessment
based on student individual
differences and community,
school, and classroom
characteristics or provides
inappropriate implications.
Identifies the value of
understanding of ELN
students’ skills and
previous learning for the
group and individuals.
Displays knowledge of
understanding of ELN
students’ skills and
previous learning,
including special needs
students.
Articulates an in-depth
understanding of ELN
students’ skills and
previous learning for the
group and individuals
including special needs
students.
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 →
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
Appropriateness for
Students
Alignment with
National, State or Local
Standards
Goals are vague or not
in evidence.
Goals presented are
inappropriate for the
class or set unrealistic
expectations for
students.
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; nor address
pre-requisite knowledge,
skills, experiences, or
other student needs.
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 and address
some pre-requisite
knowledge, skills,
experiences, and other
student needs.
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; addresses
pre-requisite knowledge,
skills, experiences and
other student needs are
considered.
Most of the goals are
explicitly aligned with
national, NJ and COE
standards.
Goals demonstrate
realistic expectations for
all students in addition to
providing for students’
critical thinking and
reflection.
Goals are aligned with
national, NJ, 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
Technical
Soundness
Adaptations
Based on the
Individual Needs
of Students
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.
The assessment plan
fails to demonstrate
evidence of student
assessment other
than after
instructions. Limited
knowledge of
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.
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.
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.
5
Accomplished
All learning goals are
assessed by the
assessment plan, and
provide students with
constructive feedback
on their learning.
Assessments contain
poorly stated criteria for
measuring student
performance leading to
student confusion.
The assessment plan
includes only one
assessment mode and
does not assess students
before, during, and after
instruction.
Assessment criteria have been
developed, but they are not clear
or are not explicitly linked to the
learning goals.
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.
The assessment plan
includes multiple assessment
modes (including
performance assessments,
lab reports, research projects,
etc.) and assesses student
performance throughout the
instructional sequence.
The assessment plan
uses formal/informal
assessments and
student’s selfassessments to assess
student performance
and effectiveness of the
instructional sequence.
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.
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 are met
and are creative and
show evidence of
outstanding problemsolving skills.
Assessment criteria are
linked to learning goals;
accurately documenting
student learning.
Score
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 is
Few lessons are explicitly
Most lessons are
All lessons are explicitly
All lessons are
linked to learning
linked to learning goals.
explicitly linked to
linked to learning goals.
explicitly linked to
goal. No learning
Few learning activities,
learning goals. Most
All learning activities,
learning goals,
activities are
assignments and
learning activities,
assignments and
demonstrating critical
Alignment with
aligned to learning resources are aligned with
assignments and
resources are aligned
thinking and reflection
Learning Goals
goals.
learning goals. Not all
resources are aligned
with learning goals. All
in activities and
learning goals are covered
with learning goals. Most learning goals are
assignments.
in the design.
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
purpose and
numerous inaccuracies.
accurate. Shows some
Focus of the content is
approach to student
Accurate
relevancy of
Content seems to be
awareness of the big
congruent with the big
learning, stressing
Representation
content.
viewed more as isolated
ideas or structure of the
ideas or structure of the
depth and breadth of
of Content
skills and facts rather than
discipline.
discipline.
content.
as part of a larger
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
integrates knowledge
goals.
goals.
from other fields of
content.
Use of a Variety
of Instruction,
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
A single,
instructional
modality is used
with textbook as
only reference.
Little variety of instruction,
activities, assignments,
and resources. Heavy
reliance on textbook or
single resource (e.g., work
sheets).
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.
Instructional strategic
assignments are varied
to accommodate
individual learners and
to achieve lesson
goals.
Score
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.
0Some 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
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.
Some modifications of the
instructional plan are
made to address
individual 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 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
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
provided.
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
remediation is provided.
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
specific.
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
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
Insights on
assessments were
manner; insights limited superficially explores
assessments and
impact of the experience
Effective
more successful than
to knowledge-based
reasons for their success
provides plausible
on student learning.
Instruction and
others.
instruction and use of
or lack thereof (no use of
reasons (based on
Current research
Assessment
formal assessments.
theory or research).
theory or research) for
findings are incorporated
their success or lack
as supportive
thereof.
documentation.
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
assessment results in assessments are
discussion of student
assessment results in
the discussion of student
Alignment
the discussion of
irrelevant or inaccurate. learning and effective
the discussion of
learning and effective
Among Goals,
student learning and
instruction, but
student learning and
instruction. Current
Instruction and
effective instruction
misunderstandings or
effective instruction.
research findings are
Assessment
and/or the
conceptual gaps are
incorporated as
connections are
present.
supportive
irrelevant or
documentation.
inaccurate.
Implications for
Future Teaching
Provides no ideas or
inappropriate ideas
for redesigning
learning goals,
Provides limited ideas
for redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment. Rationale
Provides ideas for
redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment but offers no
Provides ideas for
redesigning learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment and
Provides a repertoire of
strategies, offering
specific alternative
actions complete with
Score
Implications for
Professional
Development
instruction, and
assessment.
is inadequate; or
absent.
rationale for why these
changes would improve
student learning.
explains why these
modifications would
improve student
learning.
probable successes for
student learning.
Provides no
professional learning
goals or evidence of
future use of ethical
guidelines and other
professional
standards related to
the education of
students with ELN.
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 the
education of students
with ELN.
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
the ethical guidelines and
other professional
standards related to the
education of students with
ELN.
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 the
ethical guidelines and
other professional
standards related to
the education of
students with ELN.
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 the
ethical guidelines and
other professional
standards related to the
education of students
with ELN.