INTRODUCTION TO SCIENCE PORTFOLIO
RUBRIC
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Introduction to
Science
Portfolio:
Candidate
defines the
purpose of the
science
portfolio
Description of
Learning
Outcomes
1
Unacceptable
Does not define the
purpose of the
science portfolio.
2
Beginning
Vaguely defines the
purpose of the science
portfolio.
3
Developing
Adequately defines
the purpose of the
science portfolio.
4
Capable
Clearly and
accurately delineates
the purpose of the
science portfolio.
5
Accomplished
Defines the purpose
of the science
portfolio in a
professional and
articulate manner.
There is no
description (or a very
poor one) of the
science learning
outcomes selected.
There is a brief
description of science
outcomes, but the
number is less than
required.
There is an
acceptable
description of
science learning
outcomes.
There is a specific
description of the
science learning
outcomes.
There is an
exemplary
description of the
science outcomes.
Connections
Between TWS
Science
Elements and
College of
Education
Outcomes
There are no
connections made
between the TWS
science elements and
the COE outcomes.
The connections made
between the science
elements of the TWS
and the COE outcomes
are minimal.
The connections
made between the
science elements of
the TWS and the
COE outcomes are
satisfactory.
The connections
made between the
science elements of
the TWS and the
College of Education
outcomes are clear.
The connections
made between the
science elements of
the TWS and the
COE outcomes are
clear and focused.
Description of
TWS Science
Portfolio
Organization
There is no
description of the
TWS science
portfolio
organization.
The description of the
organization of the
TWS science portfolio
is vague and not easily
understood.
The description of
the TWS science
portfolio
organization is
acceptable.
The description of the
TWS science
portfolio organization
is logical and in an
easy to understand
format.
The description of
the organization of
the TWS science
portfolio is
excellent, well
thought out, and
logical.
SCIENCE PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT
RUBRIC
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Science
Philosophy
Statement:
Candidate has
the P-12
Science
Student as the
Focus
Spectrum
Model is the
Framework
1
Unacceptable
No evidence that the
candidate has the P12 science student as
the focus.
2
Beginning
Minimal evidence that
the candidate has the P12 science student as
the focus.
No evidence that the
SPECTRUM model
is the framework.
Candidate
Understands
Theory and
Research in
Science
Candidate has
Gained Insight
into Teaching
and Learning
Science
Through Field
Experiences
and
Coursework
3
Developing
Adequate evidence
that the candidate
has the P-12
science student as
the focus.
4
Capable
Significant evidence
that the candidate has
the P-12 science
student as the focus.
5
Accomplished
Superior evidence
that the candidate
has the P-12
science student as
the focus.
Minimal evidence that
Adequate evidence
the SPECTRUM model that the
is the framework.
SPECTRUM model
is the framework.
Significant evidence
that the SPECTRUM
model is the
framework.
Superior evidence
that the
SPECTRUM model
is the framework.
No evidence that the
candidate
understands theory
and research in
science.
Minimal evidence that
the candidate
understands theory and
research in science.
Adequate evidence
that the candidate
understands theory
and research in
science.
Significant evidence
that the candidate
understands theory
and research in
science.
Superior evidence
that the candidate
understands theory
and research in
science.
No evidence that the
candidate has gained
insight into teaching
and learning science
through field
experiences and
coursework.
Minimal evidence that
the candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and learning
science through field
experiences and
coursework.
Adequate evidence
that the candidate
has gained insight
into teaching and
learning science
through field
experiences and
coursework.
Significant evidence
that the candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and learning
science through field
experiences and
coursework.
Superior evidence
that the candidate
has gained insight
into teaching and
learning science
through field
experiences and
coursework.
Science 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 →
Indicator ↓
Knowledge of
Community,
School and
Classroom
Factors as they
apply to the
science
classroom
1
Unacceptable
Displays no
knowledge of the
characteristics of the
community, school,
and classroom, as they
apply to the science
classroom.
2
Beginning
Displays minimal,
irrelevant, or biased
knowledge of the
characteristics of the
community, school, and
classroom, as they apply
to the science
classroom.
3
Developing
Displays some
knowledge of the
characteristics of
the community,
school, and
classroom that may
affect learning, as
they apply to the
science classroom.
Displays no
Knowledge of
Characteristics knowledge of student
differences (e.g.,
of Students
development, interests,
culture, abilities/
disabilities).
Displays minimal,
stereotypical, or
irrelevant knowledge of
student differences (e.g.,
development, interests,
culture, abilities/
disabilities).
Displays general
knowledge of
student differences
(e.g., development,
interests, culture,
abilities/
disabilities).
Demonstrates general
understanding of a
variety of approaches to
learning science among
students and may know
one or two learning
modalities but not a
variety.
Demonstrates
general
understanding of a
variety of
approaches to
learning science
among students
and can distinguish
among modalities.
Knowledge of
Students’
Varied
Approaches to
Learning
Science
Fails to demonstrate
understanding of a
variety of approaches
to learning science
among students, e.g.,
multiple intelligences
and/or learning
modalities.
4
Capable
Displays a
comprehensive
understanding of the
characteristics of the
community, school,
and classroom that
may affect learning,
as they apply to the
science classroom.
5
Accomplished
Displays a
comprehensive
understanding of
the characteristics
of the community,
school, and
classroom that may
affect learning, as
they apply to the
science classroom,
citing specific data,
sources, and/ or
statistics.
Displays general and Displays and
specific knowledge of explains in-depth
student differences
knowledge of
(e.g., development,
student differences
interests, culture,
(e.g., development,
abilities/ disabilities). interests, culture,
abilities/
disabilities).
Articulates an
Articulates general
understanding of
and specific
varied learning
understanding of
science modalities
varied learning
and multiple
science modalities
intelligences.
and multiple
intelligences.
Knowledge of
Students’
Science Skills
and Prior
Learning of
Science
Displays no
knowledge of
students’ science skills
and prior learning of
science and does not
indicate either is
important.
Identifies the value of
understanding students’
science skills and prior
learning of science but
demonstrates its
importance for the
whole class only.
Identifies the value
of understanding
students’ science
skills and prior
learning of science
for the group and
individuals.
Displays knowledge
of understanding
students’ science
skills and prior
learning of science,
including special
needs students.
Implications
for Science
Instructional
Planning and
Assessment
Does not provide
implications for
science instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school,
and classroom
characteristics or
provides inappropriate
implications.
Provides minimal
implications for science
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school, and
classroom
characteristics or
provides inappropriate
implications.
Provides general
implications for
science instruction
and assessment
based on student
individual
differences and
community,
school, or
classroom
characteristics.
Provides specific
implications for
science instruction
and assessment based
on student individual
differences and
community, school,
and classroom
characteristics.
Articulates an indepth
understanding of
students’ science
skills and prior
learning of science
for the group and
individuals
including special
needs students.
Provides specific
implications and
analyzes decisions
for science
instruction and
assessment based
on student
individual
differences (ELL
and inclusion
students) and
community, school,
and classroom
characteristics.
Science Learning Goals
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Significance,
Challenge and
Variety of Goals
that Successfully
Promote the
Learning of Science
Clarity of Goals
that successfully
promote the
learning of science
Appropriateness
for Students with
different abilities,
needs, interests and
backgrounds
1
Unacceptable
Goals that
successfully promote
the learning of
science are not in
evidence.
2
Beginning
Goals that
successfully promote
the learning of
science reflect only
one type or level of
learning.
3
Developing
Goals that
successfully promote
the learning of
science reflect
several types or
levels of learning but
lack significance or
challenge.
4
Capable
Goals that
successfully promote
the learning of
science reflect
several types or
levels of learning
and are significant
and challenging.
5
Accomplished
Goals that
successfully promote
the learning of
science are
significant and
challenge thought
and expectations
including three or
more levels and
types.
Goals that
Goals that
Some of the goals
Most of the goals
Goals that
successfully promote successfully promote that successfully
that successfully
successfully promote
the learning of
the learning of
promote the learning promote the learning the learning of
science are vague or science are not
of science are clearly of science are clearly science are clearly
not in evidence.
stated clearly and are stated as learning
stated as learning
stated in behavioral
activities rather than outcomes.
outcomes
terms.
learning outcomes.
Science learning
Science learning
Some science
Most science
Science learning
goals presented are
goals are not
learning goals are
learning goals are
goals demonstrate
inappropriate for the developmentally
developmentally
developmentally
realistic expectations
class or set
appropriate; nor
appropriate and
appropriate. They
for all students in
unrealistic
address pre-requisite address some preaddress pre-requisite addition to providing
expectations for
knowledge, skills,
requisite knowledge, knowledge, skills,
for students’ critical
students with
experiences, or other skills, experiences,
and experiences of
thinking and
different abilities,
needs of students
and other needs of
students with
reflection.
needs, interests and
with different
student with
different abilities,
backgrounds.
abilities, needs,
different abilities,
needs, interests and
interests and
needs, interests and
backgrounds.
backgrounds.
backgrounds.
Science Learning
Goals are Aligned
with National, State
or Local Standards
Candidate fails to
develop science
learning goals
aligned with the
NSES, the NJCCCS
and COE standards.
Science learning
goals are not aligned
with the NSES, the
NJCCCS and COE
standards.
Some science
learning goals are
aligned with the
NSES, the NJCCCS
and COE standards.
Most science
learning goals are
explicitly aligned
with the NSES, the
NJCCCS and COE
standards.
Science learning
goals are explicitly
aligned with the
NSES, the NJCCCS
and COE standards
and are articulated
through the lesson
presentations.
Science Assessment Plan
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Alignment
with Science
Learning
Goals and
Instruction
Clarity of
Criteria and
Standards for
Performance
Uses Multiple
Assessment
Tools and
Strategies to
Achieve
Science
Learning
Goals
1
Unacceptable
Minimal plans for
pre- and postassessments are
provided;
assessments do
not measure
science learning
goals.
2
Beginning
Content and methods
of assessment lack
congruence with
science learning goals
or lack cognitive
complexity.
3
Developing
Some of the science
learning goals are
assessed through the
assessment plan, but
many assessments are
not congruent with
science learning goals
in content and
cognitive complexity.
The assessments
Assessments contain Assessment criteria
contain no criteria poorly stated criteria have been developed,
for measuring
for measuring student but they are not clear or
student
performance relative are not explicitly linked
performance
to the science
to the science learning
relative to the
learning goals leading goals.
science learning
to student confusion.
goals.
The assessment
The assessment plan
The assessment plan
plan fails to use
includes only one
includes some
multiple
assessment mode to
assessment tools but all
assessment tools
assess achievement of are either pencil/paper
and strategies to
science learning goals based (i.e., they are not
achieve science
and does not assess
performance
learning Goals.
students before,
assessments) and/or do
Candidate
during, and after
not require the
displays limited
instruction.
integration of
knowledge of
knowledge, skills and
formal/informal
critical thinking related
assessments
to science goals.
4
Capable
Each of the science
learning goals is assessed
through the assessment
plan; assessments are
congruent with the
science learning goals in
content and cognitive
complexity.
5
Accomplished
All science learning
goals are assessed
by the assessment
plan, and provide
students with
constructive
feedback on their
learning.
Assessment criteria are
clear and are explicitly
linked to the science
learning goals.
Assessment criteria
are linked to
science learning
goals, accurately
documenting
student learning.
The assessment plan
includes multiple
assessment tools
(including performance
assessments, lab reports,
research projects, etc.)
and assesses student
science achievement
throughout the
instructional sequence.
The assessment
plan uses
formal/informal
assessments and
student’s selfassessments to
assess student
science
achievement and
effectiveness of the
instructional
sequence.
Technical
Soundness
Assessments are
not designed to
measure goals
and objectives of
science lessons;
scoring
procedures are
inaccurate.
Assessments are not
valid; scoring
procedures are
inaccurate; items or
prompts are poorly
written; directions
and procedures are
confusing to students.
Adaptations
Based on the
Individual
Needs of
Students with
Different
Abilities,
Needs,
Interests and
Backgrounds
Teacher candidate
does not address
or adapt
assessments to
identified
contextual factors
based on the
individual needs
of students with
different abilities,
needs, interests
and backgrounds.
Teacher candidate
does not adapt
assessments based on
the individual needs
of students with
different abilities,
needs, interests and
backgrounds, or these
adaptations 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
Teacher candidate
makes adaptations to
assessments that are
appropriate based on
the individual needs of
some students with
different abilities,
needs, interests and
backgrounds.
Assessments appear to be
valid; scoring procedures
are explained; most items
or prompts are clearly
written; directions and
procedures are clear to
students.
Assessments appear
to be valid and
clearly written.
Assessments data
used to document
students’ strengths
as well as
opportunities for
learning science.
Teacher candidate makes
adaptations to
assessments that are
appropriate based on the
individual needs of most
students with different
abilities, needs, interests
and backgrounds.
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 Science Instruction
Rubric
TWS Standard:
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Science
Learning
Goals, Plans
and
Instruction are
Aligned
The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.
1
2
3
4
5
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
None of the
Few lessons are
Most lessons are
All lessons are
All lessons are
science learning explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
goals, plans and science learning goals.
science learning goals. science learning goals. science learning
instruction are
Few learning activities,
Most learning
All learning activities,
goals, demonstrating
aligned
assignments and
activities, assignments assignments and
critical thinking and
resources are aligned
and resources are
resources are aligned
reflection in
with science learning
aligned with science
with science learning
activities and
goals. Not all science
learning goals. Most
goals. All science
assignments.
learning goals are
science learning goals
learning goals are
covered in the design.
are covered in the
covered in the design.
design.
Teacher
Teacher candidate’s use
Teacher candidate’s
Teacher candidate’s
Teacher candidate
Accurate
candidate
does
of
science
content
use
of
science
content
use
of
content
appears
provides crossRepresentation
not convey the
contains numerous
appears to be mostly
to be accurate. Focus
content approach to
of Science
concepts,
inaccuracies. Science
accurate. Candidate
of the content is
student learning,
Content
principles,
content seems to be
shows some awareness congruent with the
stressing concepts,
theories, laws
viewed more as isolated
of the concepts,
concepts, principles,
principles, theories,
and interskills and facts rather
principles, theories,
theories, laws and
laws and interrelationships of than as part of a larger
laws and interinter- relationships of
relationships of
science to
conceptual structure.
relationships of
science.
science.
students.
science.
The science lessons
Most science lessons
All science lessons
Science Lesson Science lessons The science lessons
within the unit
within the unit are not
within the unit have
within the unit are
within the unit
and Unit
do not
logically organized
some logical
logically organized and demonstrate how
Structure
demonstrate
(e.g., sequenced).
organization and
appear to be useful in
knowledge of
understanding
appear to be somewhat moving students
science content is
of how science
useful in moving
toward achieving the
created and
content is
students toward
science learning goals. organized and
created and
achieving the science
integrates knowledge
developed.
learning goals.
from other fields of
content.
Use of a
Variety of
Instruction,
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
to Teach
Science
A single,
instructional
modality is used
to teach science
with textbook
as only
reference.
Little variety of
instruction, activities,
assignments, and
resources to teach
science. Heavy reliance
on textbook or single
type of resource (e.g.,
work sheets).
Some variety in
instruction, activities,
assignments, or
resources to teach
science but with
limited development of
student skills and
understanding.
Demonstrates a
highly creative
ability to effectively
design and employ a
range of actions,
strategies and
methods to teach
science.
Some instruction has
been designed with
reference to contextual
factors and preassessment data. Some
activities and
assignments appear
productive and
appropriate for the
needs of each student.
Significant variety in
instruction, activities,
assignments, and/or
resources to teach
science. This variety
makes a clear
contribution to
development of student
skills and learning.
Most instruction has
been designed with
reference to contextual
factors and preassessment data. Most
activities and
assignments appear
productive and
appropriate for the
needs of each student.
Use of
Contextual
Information
and Data to
Select
Appropriate
and Relevant
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
to Teach
Science
Use of
Technology
Instruction has
not been based
upon
knowledge of
science, needs
of students, or
pre-assessment
data.
Instruction has been
designed with very
limited reference to
contextual factors and
pre-assessment data.
Activities and
assignments do not
appear productive and
appropriate to the needs
of each student.
Teacher
candidate does
not use
technology
during
instruction.
Technology is
inappropriately used and
inappropriate rationale is
provided.
Teacher candidate uses
technology but it does
not make a significant
contribution to
teaching and learning
of science, or teacher
candidate provides
limited rationale for not
using technology.
Teacher candidate
integrates appropriate
technology that makes
a significant
contribution to
teaching and learning
of science, or provides
a strong rationale for
not using technology.
Teacher candidate
integrates a variety
of media and
technology into
science instruction
and relates both
directly to science
lesson goals.
All instruction
addresses the diverse
needs of individual
students and
contextual factors of
community, school
and class.
Science Instructional Decision-Making
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses on-going analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Sound
Professional
Practice in
Teaching of
Science
1
Unacceptable
Instructional
decisions are
inappropriate
and not
pedagogically
sound regarding
the students and
science content.
2
Beginning
Many instructional
decisions are
inappropriate and not
pedagogically sound
regarding the students
and science content.
3
Developing
Instructional decisions
are mostly appropriate,
but some decisions are
not pedagogically sound
regarding the students
and science content.
4
Capable
Most instructional
decisions are
pedagogically sound
regarding the students
and science content,
leading to student
learning.
Modifications
Based on
Analysis of
Student
Learning
Fails to
demonstrate
evidence of
instructional
modifications
based on
analysis of
student
learning.
Limited modifications of
the instructional plan
have been made to
accommodate individual
learners but not on the
basis of analysis of
student learning.
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.
Congruence
Between
Instructional
Modifications
and Science
Learning Goals
There is no
apparent
alignment
between
instructional
modifications
and science
learning goals.
There is little alignment
between instructional
modifications and
science learning goals.
Instructional
modifications and
science learning goals
are somewhat
congruent.
Appropriate
modifications of the
instructional plan are
made to address
individual student
needs. These
modifications are based
on the analysis of
student
learning/performance,
best practice, or
contextual factors.
Instructional
modifications are
congruent with learning
goals.
5
Accomplished
Most
instructional
decisions are
pedagogically
sound and build
on science
concepts and
skills previously
learned.
Appropriate
modifications of
the plan are
made to
individualize
instruction.
Rationale to
improve student
progress is
provided.
Modifications in
instruction are
congruent with
learning goals
and use current
research as the
rationale for the
modifications.
Analysis of Student Science Learning
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and
achievement.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
2
Beginning
3
Developing
4
Capable
5
Accomplished
Presentation is not
clear and accurate,
does not accurately
reflect the data, and
does not
communicate
information about
student progress and
science achievement.
Presentation is
somewhat clear and
accurate, vaguely
reflects the data, and
somewhat
communicates
information about
student progress and
science achievement.
Presentation clear
and accurate, reflects
the data with few
errors, and mainly
communicates
information about
student progress and
science achievement.
Presentation is clear
and accurate,
accurately reflects the
data, and
communicates
information about
student progress and
science achievement.
Neither the results of
Alignment
with Learning assessment nor
analysis of student
Goals
learning is aligned with
science learning goals.
Results of assessment
and analysis of
student learning are
occasionally aligned
to science learning
goals.
Results of assessment
and analysis of
student learning are
regularly aligned to
science learning
goals.
Results of assessment
and analysis of
student learning are
frequently aligned to
science learning
goals.
Results of assessment
and analysis of student
learning are
completely aligned to
science learning goals.
Interpretation Interpretation of
information about
of Data
student progress is
disconnected from
assessment data.
Conclusions are
missing.
Interpretation of
information about
student progress is
inaccurately related
to assessment data,
and conclusions are
missing or
unfounded.
Interpretation of
information about
student progress is
technically accurate,
but conclusions are
missing or not fully
supported by data.
Interpretation of
information about
student progress is
meaningful and
appropriate
conclusions are
drawn from the
assessment data.
Interpretation is
comprehensive with
appropriate
conclusions are drawn
from the assessment
data.
Clarity and
Accuracy of
Presentation
1
Unacceptable
Presentation does not
include data and does
not communicate
information about
student progress and
science achievement.
Evidence of
Impact on
Student
Learning
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
science learning goals.
No remediation is
provided.
Analysis of student
learning includes
little evidence of the
impact on student
learning in terms of
numbers of students
who achieved and
made progress
toward science
learning goals.
Limited 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
science learning
goals. Some
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 science
learning goal.
Remediation is
specific.
A thorough analysis of
the learning gains of
all students and
subgroups is
presented.
Remediation is
specific.
Science 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
Provides little
Engages in reflective Engages in reflective
Appreciates the value Clearly values
Engages in
evidence of
practice
practice and holds
of reflective practice reflection. Provides
Reflective
inconsistently.
reflective discussions
and discussion with
students with
Practices and reflective practice
in making decisions Seldom engages in
with colleagues or
colleagues and uses
opportunities to reflect
Make
and avoids or does
reflective discussions supervisors on a regular consequent
on their own work.
Continuous
not engage in
with colleagues or
basis.
understanding to
Shares reflections and
Efforts to
reflective
supervisors.
change practices.
insights with
Improve in
discussions with
colleagues.
Practice
colleagues or
supervisors.
Formulates
and Shares
Insights on
Effective
Science
Instruction
and
Assessment
Provides no
evidence of
formulating and
sharing insights on
effective science
instruction and
assessment.
Provides little
evidence of
formulating and
sharing insights on
effective science
instruction and
assessment.
Regularly provides
evidence of
formulating and
sharing insights on
effective science
instruction and
assessment but not
based on theory or
research.
Alignment
Among Goals,
Instruction
and
Assessment
Goals, instruction
and assessment are
not related.
Goals, instruction and Goals, instruction and
assessment are
assessment are
infrequently related.
generally related.
Regularly provides
evidence of
formulating and
sharing insights on
effective science
instruction and
assessment which is
based on theory or
research.
Consistently provides
evidence of
formulating and
sharing insights on
effective science
instruction and
assessment based on
theory or research
which are incorporated
into the science
curriculum.
Goals, instruction and Goals, instruction and
assessment are
assessment are
developed together as integrated and
part of the science
developed as part of
lesson design.
the general science
lesson design.
Implications
for Future
Teaching
Provides no ideas
or inappropriate
ideas for
redesigning science
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment.
Uses
Information
from
Students,
Supervisors,
Colleagues
and Others to
Improve
Their
Teaching and
Facilitate
Their
Professional
Growth
Rarely or never
uses information
from students,
supervisors,
colleagues and
others to improve
their teaching and
facilitate their
professional
growth.
Provides limited
ideas for redesigning
science learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment.
Rationale is
inadequate or absent.
Provides ideas for
redesigning science
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment but offers
no rationale for why
these changes would
improve student
learning.
Occasionally uses
Generally uses
information from
information from
students, supervisors, students, supervisors,
colleagues and others colleagues and others
to improve their
to improve their
teaching and facilitate teaching and facilitate
their professional
their professional
growth.
growth.
Provides ideas for
redesigning science
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment and
explains why these
modifications would
improve student
learning.
Generally uses
information from
students, supervisors,
colleagues and others
to improve their
teaching and facilitate
their professional
growth and discusses
reasons for such
behavior with
students.
Provides a repertoire
of strategies, offering
specific alternative
actions complete with
probable successes for
student learning of
science.
Generally uses
information from
students, supervisors,
colleagues and others
to improve their
teaching and facilitate
their professional
growth and
incorporates
discussion of such
behavior into the
broader science
curriculum.
Writing Mechanics and Organization
Rubric
Standard: TWS Science Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct and written in standard English.
1
2
3
4
Trait
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Writing
Mechanics
Syntax
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 runons may detract
from the overall
content of the
writing.
Syntax and word
choice may be
unsatisfactory, or
the writing may
lack cohesion.
5
Accomplished
The use of standard
written English needs
attention. More than
nine errors in
punctuation,
capitalization,
subject-verb
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 eight 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 five errors.
The use of standard
written English is
outstanding with no
more than two errors
in punctuation,
capitalization,
subject-verb
agreement may exist.
No fragments or runons may exist
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.