introduction to portfolio - kean universitytpc/portfolio/english modified tws... · web viewrubric...

English/Secondary EducationTeacher Work Sample

INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO RUBRIC

Trait 1 2 3 4 5 Unacceptable Beginning Developing Capable Accomplished

Introduction to Portfolio Does not define the purpose of the portfolio.

Vaguely defines the purpose of the portfolio.

Adequately defines the purpose of the portfolio.

Clearly and accurately delineates the purpose of the portfolio.

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, N.J. State and NCTE Standards, and the College of Education Outcomes.

The connections made between the elements of the TWS, N.J. State and NCTE Standards, and the COE Outcomes are minimal

The connections made between the elements of the TWS, N.J. State and NCTE Standards, and the COE Outcomes are satisfactory.

The connections made between the elements of the TWS, N.J. State and NCTE Standards, and the College of Education Outcomes are clear.

The connections made between the elements of the TWS, N.J. State and NCTE 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 N.J. STATEMENT RUBRIC

Trait 1 2 3 4 5 Unacceptable Beginning Developing Capable Accomplished

Philosophy N.J. Statement

Offers no evidence that the candidate has the K-12 English student as the focus.

Offers minimal evidence that the candidate has the K-12 English student as the focus.

Offers adequate evidence that the candidate has the K-12 English student as the focus.

Offers significant evidence that the candidate has the K-12 English student as the focus.

Offers superior evidence that the candidate has the K-12 English 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.

Offers minimal evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.

Offers adequate evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.

Offers significant evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.

Offers superior evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.

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 OrganizationRubric

Standard: TWS Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct, and written in standard English.

Trait1

Unacceptable2

Beginning3

Developing4

Capable5

Accomplished

Writing Mechanics The use of standard written English is unsatisfactory at this level. More than ten 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 nine errors in punctuation, capitalization, subject-verb agreement may exist or two 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, subject-verb 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 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 →Indicator ↓

1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Knowledge of Community, School and Classroom

Factors

Displays no knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom.

Displays minimal, irrelevant, or biased knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom.

Displays some knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning.

Displays a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning.

Displays and explains an in-depth understanding of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning with specific data, cited sources, and/or statistics.

Knowledge of Characteristics

of Students

Displays no knowledge of student differences (e.g., 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).

Displays general and specific knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).

Displays and explains in-depth knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).

Knowledge of Students’

Varied Approaches to

Learning

Fails to demonstrate understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students, e.g., multiple intelligences and/or learning modalities.

Demonstrates general understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students and may know one or two learning modalities but not a variety.

Demonstrates general understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students and can distinguish between multiple modalities.

Articulates an understanding of varied learning modalities and multiple intelligences.

Articulates general and specific understanding of varied learning modalities and multiple intelligences.

Knowledge of Students’ Skills and

Prior Learning

Displays no knowledge of students’ skills and previous learning and does not indicate either is important.

Identifies the value of understanding students’ skills and previous learning but demonstrates its importance for the whole class only.

Identifies the value of understanding students’ skills and previous learning for the group and individuals.

Displays knowledge of understanding students’ skills and previous learning, including special needs students.

Articulates an in-depth understanding of students’ skills and previous learning for the group and individuals including special needs students.

Implications for

Instructional Planning and Assessment

Does not provide implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and

Provides minimal implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom

Provides general implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and

Provides specific implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and

Provides specific implications and analyzes decisions for instruction and assessment based on student individual

community, school, and classroom characteristics or provides inappropriate implications.

characteristics or provides inappropriate implications.

community, school, or classroom characteristics.

community, school, and classroom characteristics.

differences (ELL and inclusion students) and community, school, and classroom characteristics.


Learning GoalsRubric

TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.


1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Significance, Challenge and

Variety

Goals are not in evidence.

Goals reflect only one type or level of learning

Goals reflect several types or levels of learning but lack significance or challenge

Goals reflect several types or levels of learning and are significant and challenging.

Goals are significant and challenge thought and expectations including three or more levels and types.

ClarityGoals are vague or not in evidence.

Goals are not stated clearly and are activities rather than learning outcomes.

Some of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes.

Most of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes

Goals are clearly stated in behavioral terms.

Appropriateness for Students

Goals presented are inappropriate for the class or set unrealistic expectations for students.

Goals are not developmentally appropriate; nor address pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences, or other student needs.

Some goals are developmentally appropriate and address some pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences, and other student needs.

Most goals are developmentally appropriate; addresses pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences and other student needs are considered.

Goals demonstrates realistic expectations for all students in addition to providing for students’ critical thinking and reflection.

Alignment with National, N.J. State or Local Standards

Fails to develop goals aligned with national, N.J. State and COE standards

Goals are not aligned with national, NJ State or COE standards.

Some goals are aligned with national, N.J. State or COE standards.

Most of the goals are explicitly aligned with national, N.J. State and COE standards.

Goals are aligned with national, N.J. State and COE standards and are articulated through the lesson presentations. Alignments are explained.


Assessment PlanRubric

TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.


1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Alignment with Learning Goals and Instruction

Minimal plans for pre and post assessments are provided; assessments do not measure learning goals.

Content and methods of assessment lack congruence with learning goals or lack cognitive complexity.

Some of the learning goals are assess through the assessment plan, but many are not congruent with learning goals in content and cognitive complexity.

Each of the learning goals is assessed through the assessment plan; assessments are congruent with the learning goals in content and cognitive complexity.

All learning goals are assessed by the assessment plan, and provide students with constructive feedback on their learning.

Clarity of Criteria and

Standards for Performance

The assessments contain no criteria for measuring student performance relative to the learning goals.

Assessments contain poorly stated criteria for measuring student performance leading to student confusion.

Assessment criteria have been developed, but they are not clear or are not explicitly linked to the learning goals.

Assessment criteria are clear and are explicitly linked to the learning goals.

Assessment criteria are linked to learning goals; accurately documenting student learning.

Multiple Modes and Approaches

The assessment plan fails to demonstrate evidence of student assessment other than after instructions. Limited knowledge of formal/informal assessments

The assessment plan includes only one assessment mode and does not assess students before, during, and after instruction.

The assessment plan includes multiple modes but all are either pencil/paper based (i.e., they are not performance assessments) and/or do not require the integration of knowledge, skills and critical thinking.

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 self-assessments to assess student performance and effectiveness of the instructional sequence.

Technical Soundness

Assessments are not designed to measure lessons goals and

Assessments are not valid; scoring procedures are inaccurate; items or

Assessments appear to have some validity. Some scoring procedures are explained; some items or prompts are

Assessments appear to be valid; scoring procedures are explained; most items or prompts are clearly

Assessments appear to be valid and clearly written. Assessments data

objectives; scoring procedures are inaccurate.

prompts are poorly written; directions and procedures are confusing to students.

clearly written; some directions and procedures are clear to students.

written; directions and procedures are clear to students.

used to document students’ strengths as well as opportunities for learning.

Adaptations Based on the

Individual Needs of Students

Teacher does not address or link assessments to identified contextual factors.

Teacher does not adapt assessments to meet the individual needs of students or these assessments are inappropriate.

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.

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.

English/Secondary EducationTeacher Work SampleDesign for Instruction

Rubric

TWS Standard: The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.Rating →

Indicator ↓1

Unacceptable2

Beginning3

Developing4

Capable5

Accomplished Score

Alignment with Learning Goals

No lesson is linked to learning goal. No learning activities are aligned to learning goals.

Few lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Few learning activities, assignments, and resources are aligned with learning goals. Not all learning goals are covered in the design.

Most lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Most learning activities, assignments, and resources are aligned with learning goals. Most learning goals are covered in the design.

All lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. All learning activities, assignments, and resources are aligned with learning goals. All learning goals are covered in the design.

All lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals, demonstrating critical thinking and reflection in activities and assignments.

Accurate Representation

of Content

Teacher does not demonstrate purpose and relevancy of content.

Teacher’s use of content appears to contain numerous inaccuracies. Content seems to be viewed more as isolated skills and facts rather than as part of a larger conceptual structure.

Teacher’s use of content appears to be mostly accurate. Shows some awareness of the big ideas or structure of the discipline.

Teacher’s use of content appears to be accurate. Focus of the content is congruent with the big ideas or structure of the discipline.

Teacher provides cross-content approach to student learning, stressing depth and breadth of content.

Lesson and Unit Structure

The lessons within the unit do not demonstrate knowledge of how content is created and developed.

The lessons within the unit are not logically organized (e.g., sequenced).

The lessons within the unit have some logical organization and appear to be somewhat useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals.

Most lessons within the unit are logically organized and appear to be useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals.

All lessons within the unit demonstrate how knowledge of content is created and organized and integrates knowledge from other fields of content.

Use of a Variety of

Instruction, Activities,

Assignments and Resources

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.

Use of Contextual Information and Data to

Select Appropriate

and Relevant Activities,

Assignments and Resources

Instruction has not been based upon knowledge of subject matter, 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 for each student.

Some instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Some activities and assignments appear productive and appropriate for each student.

Most instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Most activities and assignments appear productive and appropriate for each student.

All instruction addresses the diverse needs of individual students and contextual factors of community, school and class.

Use of Technology

Teacher does not use technology during instruction.

Technology is inappropriately used and inappropriate rationale is provided.

Teacher uses technology but it does not make a significant contribution to teaching and learning or teacher provides limited rationale for not using technology.

Teacher integrates appropriate technology that makes a significant contribution to teaching and learning or provides a strong rationale for not using technology.

Teacher integrates a variety of media and technology into instruction and relates both directly to lesson goals.


Instructional Decision-MakingRubric

TWS Standard: The teacher uses on-going analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.


1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Sound Professional

Practice

Instructional decisions are inappropriate for age of student, content, and community.

Many instructional decisions are inappropriate and not pedagogically sound.

Instructional decisions are mostly appropriate, but some decisions are not pedagogically sound.

Most instructional decisions are pedagogically sound (i.e., they are likely to lead to student learning).

Most instructional decisions are pedagogically sound and build on concepts and skills previously learned.

Modifications Based on

Analysis of Student Learning

Teacher treats class as “one plan fits all” with no modifications.Fails to demonstrate evidence of instructional modifications.

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.

Appropriate modifications of the plan are made to individualize instruction. Rational to improve student progress is provided.

Congruence Between

Modifications and Learning

Goals

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.

Modifications in instruction are congruent with learning goals and cites current research as the rationale for the modifications.


Analysis of Student LearningRubric

TWS Standard: The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.


1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Clarity and accuracy of Presentation

Presentation does not include data.

Presentation is not clear and accurate; it does not accurately reflect the data.

Presentation is understandable and contains few errors.

Presentation is easy to understand and contains no errors of presentation.

Contains no errors of presentation. Presentation is communicated with the use of technology and media.

Alignment with Learning

Goals

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 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.

Analysis is fully aligned with learning goals and provides a comprehensive profile of student learning for the whole class, subgroups, and two individuals.

Analysis is thorough and complete, recognizing student progress in developing content proficiency. Visual and narrative summaries demonstrate the extent of student progress.

Interpretation of Data

Interpretation is unsupported by data

Interpretation is inaccurate, and conclusions are missing.

Interpretation is technically accurate, but conclusions are missing or not fully supported by data.

Interpretation is meaningful, and appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data.

Interpretation is comprehensive. Appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data. Candidate has detailed the assessment and evaluation of student gains.

Evidence of Impact on Student Learning

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.

A thorough analysis of the learning gains of all students and subgroups is presented. Remediation is specific.


Reflection and Self-EvaluationRubric

TWS Standard: The teacher analyzes the relationship between his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.


1Unacceptable

2Beginning

3Developing

4Capable

5Accomplished Score

Interpretation of Student Learning

No evidence or reasons provided to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section.

Provides one possible reason as evidence to support conclusions drawn in Analysis of Student Learning.

Provides evidence but simplistic, superficial reasons are given or hypotheses to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section.

Uses evidence to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section.

Uses evidence to support more than four conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section. Explores multiple hypotheses for why some students did and others did not meet learning goals.

Insights on Effective

Instruction and Assessment

Provides no rationale for why some activities or assessments were more successful than others.

Rationale for activities or assessments presented in confusing manner; insights limited to knowledge-based instruction and use of formal assessments.

Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities or assessments and superficially explores reasons for their success or lack thereof (no use of theory or research).

Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities and assessments and provides plausible reasons (based on theory or research) for their success or lack thereof.

Reflects on own performance as a teacher focusing on the impact of the experience on student learning. Current research findings are incorporated as supportive documentation.

Alignment Among Goals, Instruction and

Assessment

Does not connect learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of

Connections among learning goals, instructions and assessments are irrelevant or

Connects learning goals, instructions, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and

Logically connects learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of

Connects learning goals, instruction and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and

student learning and effective instruction and/or the connections are irrelevant or inaccurate.

inaccurate. effective instruction, but misunderstandings or conceptual gaps are present.

student learning and effective instruction.

effective instruction. Current research findings are incorporated as supportive documentation.

Implications for Future Teaching

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.

Implications for

Professional Development

Provides no professional learning goals.

Provides goals that are not related to the insights and experiences described in this section.

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.

Presents professional learning goals that emerge from the insights and experiences descried in this section.

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

introduction to portfolio - kean universitytpc/portfolio/english modified tws... · web viewrubric...

Documents