Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Framework  and  Rubric  version  2.0  revised  Summer  2012  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

 

 
 

PLAN  1:  KNOW  YOUR  STUDENTS  IN  ORDER  TO  PLAN  YOUR  INSTRUCTION  EFFECTIVELY      
       
 

  OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:  

No  major  content  changes  were  made.    Ed  Plan  was  added  to  the  notes  as  a  data  resource  for  teachers.  

  5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/     4  Above  Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  one  of  the  following:       For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  proactively  and  appropriately   shares  information  with  other  individuals   who  can  impact  student  achievement  (e.g.   resource  teachers,  other  content  area   teachers,  counselors).   • Teacher  takes  students  and/or  family  input   into  account  during  the  planning  process.     • Teacher’s  plans  make  content  personally   meaningful  and  relevant  to  students.      
Note:  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  uses  three  or  more  sources  of  data   to  attain  students’  current  performance   levels.1   • Teacher’s  knowledge  of  students’   performance  levels  is  regularly  used  to   plan  instruction.2   • Teacher  uses  knowledge  of  students’   interests,  backgrounds,  and  learning  needs   in  the  planning  process.  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  uses  one  to  two  sources  of  data  to   attain  students’  current  performance   levels,  and/or  resources  used  may  not   accurately  determine  students’  current   performance  levels.     • Teacher’s  knowledge  of  students’   performance  levels  is  sporadically  or   occasionally  used  to  plan  instruction.     • Teacher  sporadically  or  occasionally  uses   knowledge  of  students’  interests,   backgrounds,  and  learning  needs  in  the   planning  process.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  does  not  use  data  to  determine   students’  current  performance  levels.     • Teacher’s  knowledge  of  students’  current   performance  levels  is  not  used  to  plan   instruction.     • Teacher  does  not  use  knowledge  of   students’  interests,  backgrounds,  and   learning  needs  in  the  planning  process.  

               
1

Teachers  should  not    share  information  that  may  be  confidential  or  sensitive  to  students  without  first  obtaining  appropriate  permission  to  do  so.    

                                                                                                               
 Ed  Plan  is  a  district  data  source  that  teachers  can  use  to  retreive  diverse  data  information  regarding  students.    Other  sources  that  can  be  used  to  attain  students’  current  performance  levels  include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  end-­‐of-­‐year  assessments,  through-­‐course   assessments,  interest  surveys,  learning  style  inventories,  pre/post  tests,  and  teacher  created  assessments.   2  Instructional  plans  can  include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  flexible  groups,  targeted  instructional  strategies,  and  reteaching.  

   

2  

PLAN  2:  SET  THROUGH-­‐COURSE  AND  END-­‐OF-­‐COURSE  GOALS    
 

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

     
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  note  that  teachers  are  “using”  course  goals  instead  of  “developing”  course  goals.    See  first  descriptor  at  Level  3.   • Somewhat  nebulous  terms  like  “ambitious”  were  qualified  to  offer  more  measureable  details.    See  footnote  3  as  an  example.     • Revisions  include  a  teacher’s  attention  to  standards’  appropriate  rigor  level(s)  when  planning.    Footnotes  were  added  to  explain  how  rigor  levels  are  assigned  during  planning  according  to   Bloom’s  Revised  Taxonomy.    See  footnote  4  and  the  first  descriptor  at  Level  3  as  examples.  

5  Significantly  Above  Expectation/     4  Above  Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  one  of  the  following:     For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  develops  ambitious3  and  measurable   through-­‐course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  student   achievement  goal(s)  for  individuals  and  the   class  that  are  aligned  to  the  content   standards.   • All  or  nearly  all  students  can  communicate   the  goal(s)  and  assessment(s).     • Family  members  are  engaged  in   understanding  student  goals  and  how  they   are  assessed.        
    Note:   •  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  uses  measurable  through-­‐course  and   end-­‐of-­‐course  student  achievement  goals  for   individuals  and  the  class  that  align  with   prescribed  levels  of  rigor  for  each  standard4.     • Teacher  consistently  uses  student  data  to   anticipate  and  plan  for  differentiation  and   scaffolding  needs  so  that  students  meet   through-­‐course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.5   • Most  students  can  communicate6  their   progress  toward  the  goal(s)  and  how  they   will  be  assessed.  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  uses  measurable  through-­‐course  and   end-­‐of-­‐course  student  achievement  goals  for   the  class,  but  not  for  all  individual  students,   that  are  somewhat  aligned  to  standards’   prescribed  level  of  rigor.   • Teacher  occasionally  uses  student  data  to   anticipate  and  plan  for  differentiation  and   scaffolding  needs  so  that  students  meet   through-­‐course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.     • Half  of  the  students  can  communicate  their   progress  toward  the  goal(s)  and  how  they   will  be  assessed.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Student  achievement  goals  are  not   measureable  or  aligned  to  the  standards’   prescribed  level  of  rigor.   • Teacher  does  not  use  student  data  to   anticipate  and  plan  for  differentiation  and   scaffolding  needs  so  that  students  meet   through-­‐  course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.   • Less  than  half  of  the  students  can   communicate  their  progress  toward  the   goal(s)  and  how  they  will  be  assessed.  

Through-­‐course  goals  refer  to  on-­‐going/formative  goals,  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals  refer  to  summative/annual  goals.  

                                                                                                               
3

4  Bloom’s  Revised  Taxonomy  is  used  to  gauge  a  standard’s  level  of  rigor.    The  standards’  rigor  levels  move  from  the  lower  levels  of  remembering,  understanding,  and  applying,  to  the  higher  levels  of  analyzing,  evaluating  and  creating.    All  

 “Ambitious”  goals  are  those  that  aim  to  grow  a  student  two  or  more  years  above  where  he  or  she  is  upon  entering  a  course  or  grade.    TVAAS  can  be  used  to  gauge  student  growth  for  students  in  tested  areas  and  pre  and  post  data  specific  to  course  skills  and  content   can  be  used  to  gauge  student  growth  for  students  in  courses  without  TVAAS  data.  

standards  are  not  appropriate  for  the  higher  ends  of  the  taxonomy  and  vice  versa.    Some  standards  build  content  and  skills  from  the  lower  level  to  the  higher  level,  and  should  be  addressed  within  the  appropriate  time  of  a  teacher’s   lesson/  unit  plan.   5  See  Plan  1  for  student  data  sources.    These  data  should  be  used  to  inform  how  a  teacher  scaffolds  and  differentiates  instruction  for  the  class,  groups  of  students,  and/or  individuals.   6  Goals  should  be  communicated  in  a  manner  that  is  appropriate  for  students’  grade  and  developmental  levels.  

 

3  

PLAN  3:  CREATE  OR  ADAPT  STANDARDS-­‐BASED  INSTRUCTIONAL  PLANS  AND  ASSESSMENTS  GUIDED  BY  PACING  AND  CONTENT  FROM  INSTRUCTIONAL  MAPS  
OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  include  descriptors  that  directly  align  with  all  Teach  indicators.    See  #3  a-­‐d  at  Level  3.   • Revisions  include  attention  to  students  citing  evidence,  focusing  on  text,  and  communicating  complex  ideas  in  diverse  ways,  which  are  all  explicit  instructional  shifts  inherent  in  the  Common   Core  State  Standards.    See  #3  a-­‐d  at  Level  3.  
  5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is  present,  as   well  as  one  of  the  following:       For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is  present,  as   well  as  two  or  more  of  the  following:       • Rubrics  or  exemplars  are  developed  prior  to  teaching.     • Students  participate  in  the  development  of  formative   assessments7.     • Plans  are  created  to  ensure  that  most  students  will  be   able  to  describe  how  success  on  assessments  will  be   measured.             3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Using  the  instructional  maps  as  a  guide,  the  teacher  selects,   adapts  or  creates  instructional  plans  by  doing  all  of  the   following:   1) Identifying  content  standards  that  students  will   master.     2) Aligning  instructional  plans  to  through-­‐course  and   end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.   • Teacher  consistently  uses  appropriately  complex  text  and   tasks8  in  terms  of  content  and  vocabulary  to  support   students’  mastery  of  planned  learning  objectives.9   • Teacher  ensures  lessons  include  all  of  the  following:   1) Formative  and/or  summative  assessments  that  measure   student  progress  toward  performance  objectives.   2) Lesson  objectives  aligned  to  the  content  standards  and   connected  to  prior  learning.   3) Instructional  strategies  aligned  to  standards-­‐based   objectives  that:   a. Bring  students  to  meet  objectives  through  explanation  of   tasks,  activities,  and/or  discussions  and  lead  them  to   deep  understanding  of  content.   b. Use  differentiation  to  organize  learning  activities  and   scaffolding  to  support  learning.   c. Provide  brief  and  extended  assignment  opportunities   where  students  utilize  text,  construct  arguments  and/or   make  inferences  to  communicate  complex  ideas  to   others.     d. Anticipates  common  student  misunderstandings  and   plans  redirection  through  questioning  so  that  students   realize  and  correct  their  thinking.   2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Using  the  instructional  maps  as  a  guide,  the  teacher  selects,   adapts  or  creates  instructional  plans  by  doing  some  of  the   following:   1) Identifying  content  standards  that  students  will   master.     2) Aligning  instructional  plans  to  through-­‐course   and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.   • Teacher  sporadically  uses  appropriately  complex  text  and   tasks  in  terms  of  content  and  vocabulary  to  support   students’  mastery  of  planned  learning  objectives.   • Teacher  ensures  lessons  include  some  of  the  following:   1) Formative  and/or  summative  assessments  that  measure   student  progress  toward  performance  objectives.   2) Lesson  objectives  aligned  to  the  content  standards  and   connected  to  prior  learning.   3) Instructional  strategies  aligned  to  standards-­‐based   objectives  that:   a. Bring  students  to  meet  objectives  through  explanation  of   tasks,  activities,  and/or  discussions  and  lead  them  to   deep  understanding  of  content.   b. Use  differentiation  to  organize  learning  activities  and   scaffolding  to  support  learning.   c. Provide  brief  and  extended  assignment  opportunities   where  students  utilize  text,  construct  arguments   and/or  make  inferences  to  communicate  complex   ideas  to  others.     d. Anticipates  common  student  misunderstandings  and   plans  redirection  through  questioning  so  that  students   realize  and  correct  their  thinking.   1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • The  instructional  map  is  not  used  as  a  guide  to  create   instructional  plans.   • Teacher  does  not  use  appropriately  complex  text  and  tasks   in  terms  of  content  and  vocabulary  to  support  students’   mastery  of  planned  learning  objectives.   • Teacher’s  lesson  includes  none  of  the  following:   1) Formative  and/or  summative  assessments  that  measure   student  progress  toward  performance  objectives.   2) Lesson  objectives  aligned  to  the  content  standards  and   connected  to  prior  learning.   3) Instructional  strategies  aligned  to  standards-­‐based   objectives  that:   a. Bring  students  to  meet  objectives  through  explanation  of   tasks,  activities,  and/or  discussions  and  lead  them  to   deep  understanding  of  content.   b. Use  differentiation  to  organize  learning  activities  and   scaffolding  to  support  learning.   c. Provide  brief  and  extended  assignment  opportunities   where  students  utilize  text,  construct  arguments   and/or  make  inferences  to  communicate  complex   ideas  to  others.     d. Anticipates  common  student  misunderstandings  and   plans  redirection  through  questioning  so  that  students   realize  and  correct  their  thinking.  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

  Note:  

 

Rubrics  and  exemplars  may  not  be  applicable  for  all  lessons.    

                                                                                                               
 Students  may  participate  in  developing  rubrics  or  other  content  assessments.    These  formative  assessments  are  more  teacher-­‐  generated  formative  assessments  versus  traditional  district  mandated  formative  assessments.    Appropriate  complexity  means  both  aligning  the  task  to  the  rigor  of  the  standard  and  ensuring  that  the  text/task  is  developmentally  appropriate  for  each  student   9  Text  use/  selections  are  guided  by  district’s  instructional  maps,  which  reference  Common  Core  text  selections.    See  P2,  footnote  4  for  more  information.  
7 8

 

4  

TEACH  1:  ENGAGE  STUDENTS  IN  OBJECTIVE-­‐DRIVEN  LESSONS  BASED  ON  CONTENT  STANDARDS  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  place  a  greater  emphasis  on  connecting  lesson  objectives  to  standards,  course  relevance,  prior  learning,  and  real-­‐world  connections.    Common  Core  State  Standards  address  this  via   the  standards’  staircase  of  complexity.   • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.  
 
 

 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  one  of  the  following:     For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  at  Level  3  is  present,  as   well  as  two  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  clearly  explains  what  mastery  of  the   objectives  looks  like  so  that  all  students  can   describe  how  their  learning  will  be  assessed.   • Students  understand  how  the  objectives  fit   into  the  broader  content  and  course  goals.     • Teacher  actively  and  effectively  engages   students  in  the  process  of  connecting  the   lesson  to  their  prior  knowledge.  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  communicates  lesson  objectives  to   students  in  relationship  to  standards  using   developmentally  appropriate  language.   • Teacher  explains  or  models  what  mastery  of   the  objectives  and/  or  related  performance   tasks  look  like.     • Students  can  explain  or  demonstrate  the   lesson  objectives.       • Teacher  provides  multiple  opportunities  for   engagement  in  lesson  objectives,  including   connecting  to  prior  knowledge.     • Students  can  explain  or  demonstrate  what   they  are  learning  beyond  simply  repeating  the   stated  or  posted  objectives.   • Students  can  explain  or  demonstrate  why  what   they  are  learning  is  important.    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  communicates  lesson  objectives  to   students  using  language  that  is  not   developmentally  appropriate.   • Teacher  models  what  mastery  of  the  objectives   and/or  related  performance  tasks  look  like  but   modeling  is  unclear  and  only  few  students  can   describe  how  their  learning  will  be  assessed.   • Students  can  retell  the  objectives  or  describe/   demonstrate  the  tasks  they  are  completing  but   are  unable  to  make  connections  to  what  they   are  learning.     • Teacher  provides  limited  opportunities  for   engagement  in  lesson  objectives.   • Students  repeat  or  read  posted  objectives  to   explain  what  they  are  learning.   • Students  offer  inaccurate  reasons  or   demonstrations  regarding  why  what  they  are   learning  is  important.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Lesson  objectives  are  not  communicated  to   students.   • Teacher  does  not  model  what  mastery  of  the   objectives  or  related  performance  tasks  look   like.    Students  do  not  know  how  the   objective(s)  will  be  assessed.   • Students  cannot  retell  or  demonstrate  the   objectives  or  explain  the  tasks  they  are   completing.         • Teacher  does  not  provide  opportunities  for   engagement  in  lesson  objectives.   • Students  cannot  explain  or  demonstrate  what   they  are  learning.     • Students  cannot  explain  or  demonstrate  why   what  they  are  learning  is  important.    

  Notes:   • • • • •

Examples  of  how  a  teacher  might  explain  or  model  mastery  of  objectives  include  sharing  exemplars  of  high  quality  work  when  engaging  students  in  the  lesson,  demonstrating  effective  strategies/thinking  required  to  master  the  objectives,  or  asking  students   to  state  what  they  think  mastery  would  look  like  and  clarifying  expectations  through  Q  &  A.          To  determine  if  students  can  explain  the  lesson  objectives,  observe  times  when  the  teacher  engages  students  in  the  lesson  objective  and/or  the  teacher  facilitates  a  conversation  with  students  about  the  lesson  objective.     Students  understanding  how  the  objectives  fit  into  the  broader  content  or  goals  may  be  shown  through  an  effective  teacher’s  explanation  of  how  the  lesson  connects  to  essential  questions  or  through  students’  comments.   The  teacher  can  connect  the  lesson  to  prior  knowledge  by  asking  students  to  relate  concepts  to  their  own  experiences  or  to  what  they  have  learned  in  other  classes  or  courses.     In  cases  where  the  observer  is  not  present  when  the  teacher  introduces  the  lesson,  the  observer  may  assess  the  teacher’s  use  of  the  lesson  objective  through  questioning  students.  

   

 

5  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012    

TEACH  2:  EXPLAIN  CONTENT  CLEARLY  AND  ACCURATELY  
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  focus  on  students  making  independent  connections  and  considering  multiple  perspectives  to  demonstrate  understanding  and  problem  solve.    These  revisions  are  attentive  to  the  “deep   understanding”  and  “application”  instructional  shifts  inherent  in  the  Common  Core  State  Standards.    See  first  descriptor  at  Level  3  and  the  third  and  fourth  descriptors  at  Levels  4/5.       • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.  
   

 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:       For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following;       • Teacher  explains/  demonstrates  concepts  in  a   way  that  actively  involves  students  in  the   learning  process.     • Explanations/  demonstrations  promote   student  interest  in  the  content.   • Students  make  independent  connections   through  classroom  interactions  demonstrating   that  they  understand  the  content  at  a  higher   level.     • Students,  when  possible,  consider  multiple   perspectives  and  approaches  to  learning.  10  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher’s  explanations/  demonstrations  of   content  are  clear  and  accurate.  They  build   student  understanding  of  content  and  consider   multiple  perspectives/  approaches  to  solve   problems  or  interpret  text  /content.   • Teacher  makes  connections  with  other  content   areas,  students’  experiences  and  interests,  or   current  events.   • Teacher  uses  developmentally  appropriate   language  and  explanations.   • Teacher  gives  clear,  precise  definitions  and   uses  specific  academic  language.11   • When  an  explanation  is  not  effectively  leading   students  to  understand  the  content,  the  teacher   adjusts  quickly  and  uses  an  alternative  way  to   explain  the  concept  effectively.   • Students  ask  clarifying  and/or  extension   questions  with  prompting  or  support  from   teacher  (if  appropriate)  because  they  are   engaged  in  the  content.  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher’s  explanations  are  generally  clear,   coherent,  and  accurate,  with  a  few  exceptions,   but  they  may  not  be  entirely  effective  in   building  student  understanding  of  content  or   offering  multiple  perspectives/  approaches  to   solve  problems  or  interpret  text/content.   • Teacher  makes  connections  with  other  content   areas,  students’  experiences  and  interests,  or   current  events,  but  the  connections  do  not   make  the  content  relevant  or  build  student   understanding  and  interest.     • Teacher  uses  some  language  and  explanations   may  not  be  developmentally  appropriate.   • Teacher  sometimes  give  definitions  that  are   not  completely  clear  or  precise,  or  sometimes   may  not  use  academic  language  when  it  is   appropriate  to  do  so.   • When  an  explanation  is  not  effectively  leading   students  to  understand  the  concept,  the   teacher  may  sometimes  move  on  or  re-­‐explain   in  the  same  way  rather  than  provide  an   effective  alternative  explanation.   • Students  may  ask  some  clarifying  questions   showing  that  they  are  confused  by  the   explanations.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher’s  explanations  may  be  unclear,   incoherent  or  inaccurate,  and  they  are   generally  ineffective  in  building  student   understanding  of  content.   • Teacher  does  not  make  connections  with  other   content  areas,  students’  experiences  and   interests,  or  current  events.   • Much  of  the  teacher’s  language  may  not  be   developmentally  appropriate.   • Teacher  frequently  gives  unclear  or  imprecise   definitions,  or  frequently  may  not  use  academic   language  when  it  is  appropriate  to  do  so.   • Teacher  adheres  rigidly  to  the  initial  plan  for   explaining  content  even  when  it  is  clear  that  an   explanation  is  not  effectively  leading  students   to  understand  the  concept.   • Students  may  frequently  ask  clarifying   questions  showing  that  they  are  confused  by   the  explanations,  or  students  may  be   consistently  frustrated  or  disengaged  because   of  unclear  explanations.  

                                                                                                               
10 11

 

 Examples  include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  multiple  ways  to  solve  a  problem  and  multiple  interpretations  of  text/content.    Academic  language  includes  the  usage  of  correct  grammar  and  pronunciation  in  both  written  and  verbal  contexts.  

6  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012      

TEACH  3:  ENGAGE  STUDENTS  AT  ALL  LEARNING  LEVELS  IN  APPROPRIATELY  CHALLENGING  WORK    
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • New  descriptor  added  to  focus  attention  on  grade  level  text  and  task  complexity  that  are  appropriate  to  diverse  learning  levels.    Per  Common  Core  State  Standards,  teachers  are  expected  to   scaffold  and/  or  differentiate  instruction  in  ways  that  allow  students  to  access  grade  level  content.    See  last  descriptor  at  Level  3.   • More  details  were  added  to  footnotes  11-­‐13  to  offer  examples  regarding  differentiation,  scaffolding,  and  text/task  complexity.  
 
 

 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:     For  Level  5  -­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  reachable  to  all   students  at  different  learning  levels/styles.   • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  challenging  to  all   students  at  different  learning  levels. • Teacher  designs  the  lesson  to  incorporate   additional  resources  that  extend  beyond  the   district’s  curriculum. • Teacher  engages  students  in  the  lesson  by   using  visuals  or  other  media.  
  Note:         •

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  reachable  to   students12.     • Teacher  ensures  the  lesson  meets  students   where  they  are  academically.     • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  challenging13  to   students.     • Teacher  uses  appropriately  complex  text,   tasks,  and  activities  to  support  students’   mastery  of  objectives.14  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  reachable  to  some   students.     • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  challenging  to  some   students.   • Teacher  direct  more  of  the  lesson  than   appropriate,  although  students  have  some   opportunities  to  practice  meaningfully,  apply,   and  demonstrate  what  they  are  learning.   • Teacher  sporadically  or  occasionally  uses   appropriately  complex  text  and  tasks  in  terms   of  content  and  vocabulary  to  support  students’   mastery  of  planned  learning  objectives.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  makes  the  lesson  reachable  to  few   students.   • Teacher  does  not  make  the  lesson  challenging   for  students.   • Teacher  directs  the  lesson,  and  students  have   few  opportunities  to  practice  meaningfully,   apply,  and  demonstrate  what  they  are   learning.   • Teacher  uses  text  or  tasks  that  are  not   appropriately  complex  in  terms  of  content  and   vocabulary  and/or  does  not  support  students’   mastery  of  planned  lesson  objectives.  

Examples  of  additional  resources  include  manipulatives,  teacher-­‐created  materials,  and  items  from  various  real-­‐world  sources  (e.g.,  banks,  libraries,  museums,  etc.).    

                                                                                                               

12  To  make  content  reachable  for  all  students,  a  teacher  might  differentiate  content,  process,  or  product  (using  strategies  that  might  include  flexible  grouping,  chunking  grade  appropriate  texts,  or  tiered  assignments)  in  order  to  ensure  

that  students  are  able  to  access  the  lesson  so  that  they  eventually  meet  or  exceed  grade  level  standards.  
13  In  order  for  strategies  to  lead  students  to  a  deeper  understanding  of  the  content,  a  teacher  must  understand  students’  current  levels  of  performance  and  then  purposefully  design  instructional  strategies  that  will  scaffold  student  

learning  to  a  deeper  level  so  that  they  meet  or  exceed  grade  level  expectations.  Scaffolding  is  defined  by  breaking  tasks  down  into  smaller  elements.  Examples  of  scaffolding  include  activating  prior  knowledge,  breaking  tasks  into   smaller  parts,  modeling  or  having  students  verbalize  their  thinking  process.  There  are  many  effective  techniques  for  scaffolding  learning;  however,  scaffolding  should  be  well  executed  and  appropriate  to  the  lesson  objectives.     Conversely,  the  techniques  can  also  be  used  ineffectively.  In  order  to  be  effective,  the  scaffolding  technique  must  be  well  executed  and  appropriate  to  the  objectives,  and  thus  succeed  in  addressing  the  student’s  misunderstanding.   14  District’s  instructional  maps  guide  text  use/  selections.    Task  complexity  refers  to  engaging  students  in  ways  that  align  to  Bloom’s  levels  of  rigor  regarding  the  lesson’s  standards-­‐based  objective(s).    A  task  whose  standards  requires  the   rigor  level  of  “evaluation”  should  not  be  limited  to  activities  that  only  require  “remembering”  or  “applying.”      

 

7  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012    

 

TEACH  4:  PROVIDE  STUDENTS  MULTIPLE  WAYS  TO  ENGAGE  WITH  CONTENT  
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • New  descriptor  added  at  Level  3  (last  descriptor)  to  focus  on  strategies  that  position  students  to  discuss  and  write  about  complex  text  and  tasks.     • Levels  4/5-­‐second  descriptor  in  TEM  1.0  removed  because  it  is  referenced  in  T1.   • Early  childhood  and  special  education  TEM  2.0  addendum/  notes  include  “with  prompting  and  support  from  the  teacher”  for  descriptors  that  are  not  worded  in  developmentally  appropriate   language  for  early  learners  or  students  with  disabilities.  

 
   
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  one  of  the  following:       For  Level  5  -­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  all  of  the  following:       • Students  are  provided  with  choices  and  taught   how  to  self-­‐select  strategies  that  will  help   them  master  lesson  objectives.   • Students  can  explain  or  demonstrate  the   strategies  they  use  and  how  they  relate  to   what  they  are  learning  in  terms  of  content   standards.      

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Strategies  are  aligned  to  the  lesson  objectives.     • Strategies  have  a  clear,  intentional  purpose.     • Strategies  enable  students  to  meet  or  exceed   lesson  objectives  with  appropriate  scaffolding   and  differentiation.15   • There  is  an  appropriate  balance  between   teacher-­‐directed  instruction  and  student-­‐ centered  learning.     • Students  practice,  apply,  and  demonstrate   what  they  are  learning  through  discussion   and/  or  writing  about  complex  text,  tasks,  or   concepts.  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Strategies  are  somewhat  aligned  to  the  lesson   objectives.     • Some  instructional  activities  clearly  have  a   purpose  relative  to  accomplishing  the   objective  while  others  keep  students  busy   without  a  purposeful  use  of  time.   • Differentiation  and  scaffolding  strategies  used   by  the  teacher  are  not  appropriate  for  all   students  and  only  some  students  meet  lesson   objectives.   • Students  have  some  time  to  practice,  apply,   and  demonstrate  what  they  are  learning   through  discussion  and/  or  writing  about   complex  text,  tasks,  or  concepts,  but  there  is   more  teacher-­‐directed  instruction  than   appropriate.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Strategies  are  not  aligned  to  the  lesson   objectives.   • Instructional  activities  do  not  have  a  clear   purpose  and  keep  students  busy  without  a   purposeful  use  of  time.     • Strategies  do  not  enable  students  to  meet   lesson  objective.   • Lesson  is  almost  entirely  teacher-­‐directed,  and   students  have  few  opportunities  to  practice,   apply,  and  demonstrate  what  they  are   learning  through  discussion  and/  or  writing   about  complex  text,  tasks,  or  concepts.    

         

                                                                                                               
15  Appropriate  scaffolding  and  differentiation  of  strategies  occur  by  using  student  performance  levels  to  differentiate  the  process  students  use  to  engage  in  content  and/or  the  products  students  are  required  to  produce  as  long  as  the  

differentatied  products  are  ultimately  aligned  to  the  level  of  rigor  required  by  lesson  objectives.    See  T3  footnotes  for  more  information.  

 

8  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012    

 

TEACH  5:  USE  STRATEGIES  THAT  DEVELOP  HIGHER-­‐LEVEL  THINKING  SKILLS            
   

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  include  attention  to  students  citing  evidence  and  focusing  on  text/  content  through  writing  and  discussion.  See  descriptors  three  and  four  at  Levels  4/5  and  all  descriptors  at  level  3.     These  revisions  all  address  the  Common  Core  State  Standards’  focus  on  students  being  more  independent  thinkers,  problem  solvers,  and  constructors  of  viable  arguments.  

 
 
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:     For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:         • Teacher  uses  strategies  that  challenge  students   to  probe  for  higher-­‐order  understanding,   synthesize  complex  materials,  and  arrive  at   new  understanding.16   • Teacher’s  questions  push  students  beyond   their  initial  thinking.   • Students  independently  generate  their  own   questions  and  strategies  to  demonstrate   understanding  and  appropriate  application  of   concepts.     • Students  monitor  their  own  thinking  to  ensure   that  they  understand  what  they  are  learning.  
   

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:     • Teacher  engages  students  in  activities,  tasks,   and/or  discussions  that  build  on  a  solid   foundation  of  knowledge  leading  to  higher   order  thinking  skills.     • Questions  and  tasks  are  clear  and  scaffolded  in   ways  that  lead  students  to  a  higher  level  and   require  them  to  cite  evidence  orally  and/or  in   writing  to  justify  a  solution(s)17.   • Teacher  models  his  or  her  own  thought   process  for  generating  and  asking  questions  so   that  students  begin  to  generate  their  own   questions.  18   •  Teacher  provides  helpful  suggestions  and/  or   redirects  with  questions,  rather  than  simply   providing  the  answers.  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:     • Teacher  engages  students  in  tasks  and   activities  and/  or  discussions  that  build  on  a   solid  foundation  of  knowledge,  but  rarely  bring   students  to  higher  order  thinking.   • Questions  and  tasks  rarely  bring  students  to   higher  order  thinking  or  require  students  to   cite  evidence.   • Teacher  shares  his  or  her  own  thought  process   for  generating  and  asking  questions,  but  does   not  ask  students  to  develop  their  own   questions  as  a  result.   • Teacher  generally  defaults  to  answering   his/her  own  questions  or  giving  students   answers.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:     • Teacher  does  not  engage  students  in  tasks  and   activities  that  extend  their  thinking.   • Teacher  asks  primarily  low-­‐level  questions,  or   questions  are  confusing  to  students  and  do  not   require  students  to  cite  evidence.   • Teacher  does  not  model  his  or  her  own   thought  process  for  generating  and  asking   questions,  and  does  not  asks  students  to   develop  their  own  questions  for  each  other.   • Teacher  does  not  provide  suggestions  when   students  are  unable  to  answer  questions.      

 

                                                                                                               
16  Synthesis  of  complex  materials  refers  to  students  logically  combining  ideas  from  diverse  text/or  content  to  arrive  at  a  new,  idea,  understanding,  defense,  analysis,  application,  or  creation.   17  “Levels”  of  thinking  should  be  aligned  with  the  standard-­‐based  objective’s  level  of  rigor.    Per  the  standard  to  which  a  teacher  is  teaching,  it  may  or  may  not  be  appropriate  to  see  a  lesson  only  move  from  “remembering”  to  

“understanding”  based  on  where  the  teacher  is  within  the  unit  of  study.      

18

Teacher  might  model  his  or  her  thinking  using  text  to  generate  thoughts,  grapple  with,  and/  or  ask  questions  of  text  as  a  foundation  for  students  to  begin  developing  their  own  questions  and  strategies  for  each  other  using  text  as  a  result  of  modeling.    A  math  example  of  this  descriptor  is  a  teacher  using  a  think  aloud  to  decontextualize  a  math  word  problem  or  pattern  so  that  students  see  how  the  words  equate  to  mathematical  operations  (word  problem)  or  so  that  students  understand  how  geometric  shapes   repeat  (pattern).  

 

9  

TEACH  6:  CHECK  FOR  UNDERSTANDING  AND  RESPOND  APPROPRIATELY  DURING  THE  LESSON  
 

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • No  major  content  revisions  were  made.    Some  of  the  language  was  revised  to  be  more  succinct.  
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:     For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  checks  for  understanding  at  all  key   moments.     • Teacher  uses  a  variety  of  methods  to  check  for   understanding.   • The  teacher  integrates  information  gained   from  the  checks  by  making  adjustments  to  the   content  or  delivery  of  the  lesson,  as  needed.   • Teacher  anticipates  student   misunderstandings  and  addresses  them  by   redirecting  questions  and/or  offering   discussions  that  lead  to  problem  solving.   • Teacher  is  able  to  address  student   misunderstandings  effectively  without  taking   away  from  the  flow  of  the  lesson  or  losing  the   engagement  of  students  who  do  understand.
Notes:  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  periodically  checks  for  understanding   of  content.     • Teacher  maintains  the  “pulse”  of  the  class’   understanding  in  order  to  adjust  instruction.   • Teacher  makes  appropriate  and  effective   adjustments  to  the  lesson  when  needed.     • Teacher  uses  scaffolding  techniques  as  needed   to  enable  students  to  construct  their  own   understandings.       • When  a  misunderstanding  occurs,  the  teacher   responds  with  another  approach/strategy.    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  sometimes  checks  for  understanding   of  content,  but  misses  several  key  moments.   • Teacher  gets  a  “pulse”  of  the  class’   understanding  from  most  checks.   • Teacher  attempts  to  make  adjustments  to  the   lesson  but  the  adjustments  are  not  effective.     • Teacher  may  primarily  respond  to   misunderstandings  by  using  scaffolding   techniques  that  are  teacher-­‐driven  when   student-­‐driven  techniques  could  have  been   effective.   • Teacher  may  sometimes  persist  in  using  a   particular  technique  for  responding  to  a   misunderstanding,  even  when  it  is  not   succeeding.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  rarely  or  never  checks  for   understanding  of  content,  or  misses  nearly  all   key  moments.   • Teacher  does  not  get  an  accurate  “pulse”  of  the   class’  understanding  from  most  checks.19     • Teacher  does  not  attempt  to  adjust  the  lesson.     • Teacher  may  only  respond  to   misunderstandings  by  using  scaffolding   techniques  that  are  teacher-­‐driven  when   student-­‐driven  techniques  could  have  been   effective.   • Teacher  may  frequently  persist  in  using  a   particular  technique  for  responding  to  a   misunderstanding,  even  when  it  is  not   succeeding.  

• A  teacher  does  not  necessarily  have  to  check  with  every  student  in  order  to  gauge  the  understanding  of  the  class  (get  the  “pulse”).    A  series  of  questions  posed  to  the  entire  class  can  enable  a  teacher  to  get  the  “pulse”  of  the  class  if  the  teacher  checks  the  

understanding  using  strategies  like  fist-­‐to-­‐five,  whole-­‐class  white  board  responses,  etc.    If  the  teacher  finds  that  many  students  did  not  understand  some  part  of  the  lesson,  and  immediately  reteaches  that  part  to  the  entire  class,  this  should  count  as  effectively   getting  the  “pulse”  of  the  class  because  the  teacher  gained  enough  information  to  be  able  to  adjust  subsequent  instruction.   • For  some  lessons,  checking  the  “pulse”  of  the  class  may  not  be  an  appropriate  standard.  For  example,  if  students  are  spending  the  majority  of  the  period  working  on  individual  essays  and  the  teacher  is  conferencing  with  a  few  students,  it  may  not  be  necessary   for  the  teacher  to  check  the  understanding  of  the  entire  class.  In  these  cases,  the  teacher  should  be  judged  based  on  how  deeply  and  effectively  s/he  checks  for  the  understanding  of  the  students  with  whom  s/he  is  working.   • In  some  lessons,  it  is  appropriate  to  check  for  understanding  of  directions,  in  addition  to  checking  for  understanding  of  content.  However,  a  teacher  who  only  checks  for  understanding  of  directions  and  rarely  or  never  checks  for  understanding  of  content  is  not   effectively  checking  for  understanding.     • At  some  points  in  a  lesson,  it  is  not  appropriate  to  immediately  respond  to  student  misunderstandings  (for  example,  at  the  beginning  of  an  inquiry-­‐based  lesson,  or  when  stopping  to  respond  to  a  single  student’s  misunderstanding  would  be  an  ineffective  use   of  instructional  time  for  the  rest  of  the  class).  In  such  cases,  an  effective  teacher  might  wait  until  later  in  the  lesson  to  respond  and  scaffold  learning.  Observers  should  be  sensitive  to  these  situations  and  not  penalize  a  teacher  for  failing  to  respond  to   misunderstandings  immediately  when  it  would  be  more  effective  to  wait,  provided  that  the  teacher  makes  some  arrangement  to  address  the  misunderstandings  later  and  makes  this  clear  to  the  students.  

                                                                                                               
19  For  example,  the  teacher  might  neglect  some  students  or  ask  very  general  questions  that  do  not  effectively  assess  student  understanding.  

 

10  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

 

 

TEACH  7:  MAXIMIZE  INSTRUCTIONAL  TIME    
OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • No  major  content  revisions  were  made.    Some  of  the  language  was  revised  to  be  more  succinct.   • Indicator’s  footnotes  were  removed;  the  one  remaining  footnote  references  appropriate  pacing  versus  specific  times.  
   
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  one  of  the  following:     For  Level  5  –  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  executes  the  lesson  at  an  appropriate   pace  that  engages  students.   •  Students  who  finish  assigned  work  early  have   something  else  meaningful  to  do.   • Teacher  makes  real-­‐time  adjustments  to  lesson   pacing  based  on  information  gathered  from   checks  for  understanding  if  needed.    

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  has  instructional  materials  prepared   at  the  start  of  class.     • Instructional  time  is  effectively  maximized.   Students  wait  time  is  minimal.   • Teacher  spends  an  appropriate  amount  of  time   on  each  part  of  the  lesson.   • Teacher  executes  lesson  at  an  appropriate   pace20,  such  that  students  are  almost  never   disengaged  or  left  without  anything  meaningful   to  do.    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  has  most  instructional  materials   prepared  at  the  start  of  class.     • Instructional  time  is  not  always  maximized  and   students  may  be  idle  for  short  periods  of  time   while  waiting  for  the  teacher.   • Teacher  may  spend  too  much  time  on  one  part   of  the  lesson.   • Teacher  executes  lesson  at  a  moderate  pace,   but  students  are  sometimes  disengaged  or  left   without  anything  meaningful  to  do.  

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  does  not  have  instructional  materials   prepared  at  the  start  of  class.   • Instructional  time  is  not  used  effectively  and   students  may  be  idle  for  significant  periods  of   time  while  waiting  for  the  teacher.   • Teacher  may  spend  an  inappropriate  amount   of  time  on  one  or  more  parts  of  the  lesson.   • Teacher  executes  lesson  at  a  notably  slow  pace,   and  students  are  frequently  disengaged  or  left   without  anything  meaningful  to  do.  

    Note:     • Teachers  should  not  be  penalized  if  students  are  working  /  discussing  in  groups  and  the  teacher  is  rotating  throughout  the  room,  observing,  listening,  and  questioning  to  enhance  students’  understanding.                    

 

                                                                                                               
20  The  lesson’s  pacing  speed  should  be  approporate  to  the    content  covered,  instructional  strategies  used,  and  lesson  adjustments  made  based  on  a  teacher’s  checks  for  understanding  .    

 

11  

CULTIVATE  LEARNING  ENVIRONMENT  1:  BUILD  A  RESPECTFUL,  LEARNING-­‐FOCUSED  CLASSROOM  COMMUNITY  
OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.   •  
 
 

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:       For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:     •  Students  demonstrate  frequent  positive   engagement  with  their  peers.   • There  is  evidence  that  the  teacher  has   individualized  relationships  with  students  in   the  class.     • Students  are  supportive  of  their  peers.   • Students  give  praise  or  encouragement  to  their   peers  when  appropriate.  

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  demonstrates  positive  rapport  with   class.       • Teacher  reinforces  positive  behavior  and  good   academic  work.   • Teacher  promotes  an  environment  where   students  work  hard,  remain  focused  and   persevere  through  challenges.   • Students  are  engaged  and  invested  in  their   work.   • Students  feel  safe  to  take  on  challenges  and   risk  failure.21     • Teacher  promotes  a  respectful  learning   environment.22    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  has  a  positive  rapport  with  some   students  but  not  others  or  demonstrates  little   rapport  with  students.   • Teacher  rarely  reinforces  positive  behavior   and  good  academic  work,  doing  so  for  some   students  but  not  for  others  in  a  meaningful   way.   • Teacher  occasionally  promotes  an   environment  where  students  work  hard.     • Students  are  generally  engaged  in  their  work,   but  are  not  highly  invested  in  it.23   • Some  students  are  willing  to  take  academic   risks,  but  others  may  not  be.24   • Students  are  generally  respectful  of  the   teacher  and  their  peers,  but  there  are  some   exceptions.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • There  may  be  little  or  no  evidence  of  a  positive   rapport  between  the  teacher  and  the  students,   or  there  may  be  evidence  that  the  teacher  has   a  negative  rapport  with  students.   • Teacher  may  never  reinforce  positive  behavior   and  good  academic  work,  or  s/he  may  do  so   for  only  a  few  students.   • Teacher  does  not  promote  an  environment   where  students  work  hard.    Students  may   demonstrate  disinterest  or  lack  of  investment   in  their  work.   • Students  are  generally  not  willing  to  take  on   challenges  and  risk  failure.   • Students  may  frequently  be  disrespectful  to   the  teacher  or  their  peers.      

  Notes:   • An  example  of  students  being  -­‐  supportive  of  their  peers  is  students  collaborating  and  helping  each  other.     • Brief  interruptions  due  to  student  excitement  (for  example,  when  a  student  accidentally  shouts  out  an  answer  because  s/he  is  excited  to  respond  to  the  question)  should  not  be  counted  against  a  teacher  unless  they  occur  constantly  and  significantly  interfere   with  the  lesson  or  with  the  ability  of  other  students  to  respond.  

                                                                                                               

21  For  example,  students  are  encouraged  to  answer  questions  and  feel  comfortable  asking  the  teacher  for  help.   22  For  example,  students  listen  and  do  not  interrupt  when  their  peers  ask  or  answer  questions.   23  For  example,  students  might  spend  significant  time  off-­‐task  or  require  frequent  reminders;  students  might  give  up  easily;  or  the  teacher  might  communicate  messages  about  the  importance  of  the  work,  but  there  is  little  evidence  that  

students  have  internalized  them.  
24  For  example,  some  students  might  be  reluctant  to  answer  questions  or  take  on  challenging  assignments;  some  students  might  be  hesitant  to  ask  the  teacher  for  help  even  when  they  need  it;  or  some  students  might  occasionally  respond  

negatively  when  a  peer  answers  a  question  incorrectly.  

 

12  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012      

CULTIVATE  LEARNING  ENVIRONMENT  2:  DEVELOP  CLASSROOM  PROCEDURES  AND  ROUTINES    
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.  

 
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:     For  Level  5  –  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:     • Routines  and  procedures  run  smoothly   without  prompting.   • Students  know  their  responsibilities  and  ask   few  questions  about  what  to  do.   • Transitions  are  orderly,  efficient,  systematic,   and  require  little  teacher  direction.   • Students  share  responsibility  for  the   operations  and  routines  in  the  classroom.  
    Notes:   •            

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:         • Routines  and  procedures  run  smoothly  with   minimal  prompting  from  the  teacher;  students   generally  know  their  responsibilities.   • Transitions  are  generally  smooth  with  some   teacher  direction.   • Routines  support  the  effective  use  of   instructional  time.      

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Routines  and  procedures  are  in  place  but   require  significant  teacher  prompting  and   direction;  students  may  be  unclear  about  what   they  should  be  doing  and  may  ask  questions   frequently.   • Transitions  are  fully  directed  by  the  teacher   and  may  be  less  orderly  and  efficient.   • Routines  are  ineffective  causing  the  loss  of   some  instructional  time.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Routines  and  procedures  are  not  evident,  so   the  teacher  directs  every  activity;  students  are   unclear  about  what  they  should  be  doing  and   ask  questions  constantly  or  do  not  follow   teacher  directions.   • Transitions  are  disorderly  and  inefficient.   • Routines  are  ineffective  or  non-­‐existent   causing  a  significant  loss  of  instructional  time.      

Teachers  using  Responsive  Classroom  are  encouraged  to  prompt  students  regarding  routines  and  procedures.    Also  consider  the  developmental  stage  of  early  learners  (pre-­‐K-­‐2nd  grade)  if  a  teacher  is  prompting  students  regarding  routines  and  procedures.   Ratings  should  not  count  against  teachers  in  this  case.  

         

 

13  

       

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

CULTIVATE  LEARNING  ENVIRONMENT  3:  USE  CLASSROOM  SPACE  AND  RESOURCES  TO  SUPPORT  INSTRUCTION    

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  include  students’  engagement  in  the  selection  of  resources  that  support  their  learning  with  specific  attention  to  students’  awareness  of  the  relevance  and  reliability  of  the  sources  they   choose.    Common  Core’s  writing  anchor  standards,  which  undergird  all  Common  Core  standards,  focus  on  students’  ability  to  research  to  build  and  present  knowledge.     • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.  
   
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:     For  Level  5–  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:       • Use  of  space  and  materials  are  utilized  to   enrich  learning.   • Resources  or  tools  are  available  to  support   and  extend  student  learning.       • Teacher  considers  student  interests  when   selecting  resources.     • Students  determine  the  relevance  and   reliability  of  available  resources.   • Students  select  resources  that  help  them   to  demonstrate  their  understanding  of   concepts  and/or  completion  of  tasks.    

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Use  of  space  and  materials  promotes  learning.   • Classroom  resources  support  instruction.   • Resources  support  activities  that  help  students   achieve  mastery  of  standards.25   • Resources  are  leveled  or  differentiated  based   on  student  needs,  and  are  used  to  help   students  meet  or  exceed  standards.    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Use  of  space  and  materials  rarely  promotes   learning.   • Classroom  resources  inconsistently  stimulate   student  interest  in  the  content.   • Resources  inconsistently  support  activities   that  help  students  achieve  mastery  of   standards.   • Resources’  leveling  or  differentiation  is   misaligned  based  on  students’  needs,  and/or   are  not  used  to  help  students  meet  or  exceed   grade  or  course  level  expectations.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Use  of  space  and  materials  do  not  promote   learning.   • Classroom  resources  do  not  stimulate  student   interest  in  the  content.   • Resources  do  not  support  activities  that  help   students  achieve  mastery  of  standards.    

    Note:   • Examples  of  how  resources  can  extend  learning  include  posting  indictors  of  mastery  with  student-­‐friendly  explanations  or  materials  that  students  can  use  to  extend  their  learning  after  they  have  completed  instructional  assignments.    

 

                                                                                                               
25  Resources  (including  core  texts,  intervention  programs  or  supplementary  materials)  are  selected  based  on  their  alignment  to  standards  and  students’  needs  where  appropriate.    Resources  are  not  simply  used  because  they  are  adopted;  

rather,  the  teacher  is  thoughtful  and  strategic  about  how  to  use  the  resources  given  the  students’  needs  in  the  classroom.  

 

14  

     

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012  

CULTIVATE  LEARNING  ENVIRONMENT  4:  MANAGE  STUDENT  BEHAVIOR  
OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  are  tweaks  to  v1.0  to  make  language  more  succinct.  
 
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:       For  Level  5–  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:       • Behavioral  expectations  are  clear  to  all   students  and  there  is  little  evidence  of  off-­‐task   behavior  in  the  classroom.   • Students  self-­‐manage  their  behavior  and/or   re-­‐direct  their  peers  when  appropriate.     • Expectations  for  student  behavior  are  so   clearly  understood  that  there  is  little  need  to   refer  to  them.   • Flow  of  the  lesson  is  rarely  impeded  by   inappropriate  or  off-­‐  task  student  behavior   (because  no  such  behavior  occurs  or  when   such  behavior  occurs  the  teacher  addresses   it.)  
                 

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Behavioral  expectations  are  clear  to  most   students  resulting  in  only  occasional  off-­‐task   behavior.   • Teacher  regularly  promotes  and  reinforces   positive  behavior.26   • Off-­‐task  behavior  is  redirected  in  a  manner   that  solves  the  issue  and  maximizes   instructional  time.     • Disruptive  behavior27  is  de-­‐escalated  with   little  interruption  to  instructional  time.      

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Behavioral  expectations  may  be  unclear  or   inconsistent  resulting  in  frequent  off-­‐task   behavior  in  the  classroom.   • Teacher  rarely  promotes  and  reinforces   positive  behavior.   • Off-­‐task  behavior  is  redirected  in  a  manner   that  may  not  solve  the  issue  and/or  interrupts   some  instructional  time.     • Disruptive  behavior  is  de-­‐escalated  with  some   interruption  to  instructional  time.      

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Behavioral  expectations  are  not  consistent  or   clear.     • Teacher  does  not  promote  or  reinforce   positive  behavior.     • Off-­‐task  behavior  is  not  redirected  in  a   manner  that  solves  the  issue  and/or   significantly  interrupts  instructional  time.   • Disruptive  behavior  causes  significant   interruption  to  instructional  time.    

                                                                                                               
26  Positive  reinforcements  consistent  with  Responsive  Classroom  and  No-­‐Nonsense  nurturing  should  be  implemented  where  appropriate.   27  Disruptive  behavior  can  be  defined  as  behavior  that  requires  signficant  teacher  invervention.        

 

15  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012      

 

REFLECT  AND  ADJUST  1:  MONITOR  PROGRESS  RELATIVE  TO  THROUGH-­‐COURSE  AND  END-­‐OF-­‐COURSE  GOALS    
   

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • Revisions  include  a  sub-­‐descriptor  regarding  monitoring  students’  mastery  of  standards.    See  second  descriptor’s  sub-­‐descriptor  at  Level  3.  

 
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:       For  Level  5-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:       • Teacher  proactively  leads  data  analysis  with   colleagues  and  offers  positive  suggestions.     • Most  students  know  their  progress  towards   mastery  of  through-­‐course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course   goals.     • Families  can  articulate  students’  progress  using   data  as  a  reference.   • Families,  students,  and  teacher  engage  in   discussions  about  students’  strengths  and  areas   of  growth  and  create  an  action  plan  to  support   students.    
      Note:   •

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  analysis  of  student  data  includes  the   use  of  assessments  that  measure  many  aspects   of  student  progress28.   • Teacher  routinely:   1) uses  assessments  to  measure  and  monitor   students’  progress  toward  mastery  of   content  standards  and  progress  toward   through-­‐course  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.       2) provides  students  with  multiple  ways  of   demonstrating  mastery.29     • Teacher  is  timely  in  recording  the  student   progress  data  and  uses  a  system30  that  allows   for  easy  analysis  of  student  progress  toward   mastery.31    

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  analysis  of  student  data  includes  the   use  of  assessments  that  measure  one  to  two   aspects  of  student  progress.     • Teacher  sometimes  uses  assessments  to   measure  students’  progress  toward  mastery  of   content  standards.   • Teacher  rarely  records  the  student  progress   data.    

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  analysis  of  student  data  does  not   include  the  use  of  assessments  that  measure   additional  aspects  of  student  progress.   • Teacher  does  not  routinely  use  assessments  to   measure  students’  progress  toward  mastery  of   content  standards.   • Teacher  does  not  routinely  record  student   progress  data.  

Student  progress  can  include  areas  such  as  academics,  behavior  and  attendance.  

                                                                                                               

28  Aspects  of  student  progress  can  include  areas  such  as  critical  thinking,  behavior,  attendance,  and  mastery  of  content  knowledge.   29  Examples  of  multiple  ways  that  mastery  can  be  demonstrated  include  assessment  methods  like  selected  response,  constructed  response,  performance  tasks,  and  personal  communication.       30  Systems  for  recording  student  progress  include  grade  books,  spreadsheets,  and  charts.   31  Examples  of  data  analysis  can  include  identifying  trends,  item  analysis,  and/or  identifying  areas  for  reteaching.

 

 

16  

Memphis  City  Schools  *  Teacher  Effectiveness  Measure  Teaching  and  Learning  Framework  Rubric   Revised  July  27,  2012          

REFLECT  AND  ADJUST  2:  USE  STUDENT  DATA  TO  INFORM  AND  MODIFY  INSTRUCTIONAL  PRACTICE    
 

OVERVIEW  OF  REVISIONS:   • No  revisions  were  made.    

 

 
 

5  Significantly  Above  Expectations/  4  Above   Expectations   For  Level  4-­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  two  of  the  following:       For  Level  5  -­‐  All  evidence  supporting  Level  3  is   present,  as  well  as  three  or  more  of  the  following:     • Teacher  provides  opportunities  for  students  to   self-­‐manage  on-­‐going  practice  of  a  skill  in   addition  to  formal  reteaching,  if   developmentally  appropriate.   • Teacher  actively  seeks  feedback  from  peers   and/or  students  and  makes  adjustments  to   instruction  as  a  result.     • Teacher  spirals  skills  and  concepts  to  ensure   maintenance  of  knowledge.   • Teacher  designs  strategic  and  targeted   interventions  based  on  deficiencies  in  skills  or   knowledge  as  identified  by  data  results.        
    Notes:   • • •

3   Meeting  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  routinely  modifies  daily  instruction   based  on  results  of  data.   • Teacher’s  long-­‐term  plans  are  routinely   adjusted  to  accommodate  reteaching.     • Teacher’s  reteaching  meets  the  needs  of   individuals  and  groups  in  order  to  ensure   student  progress.32  

2   Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  rarely  modifies  instruction  based  on   results  of  data  when  needed,  or  changes  in   instruction  occur  but  they  are  not  based  on   data.     • Teacher’s  long-­‐term  plans  are  infrequently   adjusted  to  accommodate  reteaching.   • Teacher  attempts33  reteaching,  but  it  does  not   meet  the  needs  of  individuals  and/or  groups.          

1   Significantly  Below  Expectations   The  following  best  describes  what  is  observed:       • Teacher  does  not  modify  lesson  based  on   results  of  data.     • Teacher’s  long-­‐term  plans  are  not  adjusted  to   accommodate  reteaching.     • Teacher  does  not  make  an  attempt  to  reteach.    

An  example  of  an  opportunity  for  student  self-­‐management  can  include  stations  that  students  can  go  to  when  they  are  finished  with  their  assignments  that  focus  on  different  skills  or  standard.     Examples  of  spiraling  include  providing  plans  for  when  reteaching  will  happen  for  individuals  and  groups  of  students  and  adjustments  of  current  lesson  plans.   Intervention  for  students,  who  are  deficient  with  certain  skills  and  concepts,  should  occur  daily.  Formative  assessments  should  be  used  to  determine  deficiencies.    

                                                                                                               
32  Student  progress  is  defined  by  progress  toward  mastery  of  lesson  objectives,  through-­‐course  goals,  and  end-­‐of-­‐course  goals.   33  An  unsuccessful  attempt  at  reteaching  can  be  the  result  of  reteaching  in  the  same  manner  the  content  was  originally  taught,  demonstrating  a  lack  of  understanding  of  why  the  first  attempt  was  unsuccessful.

 

 

17  

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful