Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1.

Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1

Is there a problem? cc-by-nc-sa https://flic.kr/p/7iLCA5https://flic.kr/p/7iLCA5 cc-by-nc-sa 2.0, 7-how-7, https://flic.kr/p/7iLCA5https://flic.kr/p/7iLCA5

3 Session Goals During this session, reviewers will: Develop a common understanding of the criteria in the dimensions. Develop a common understanding of how the rating scale correlates to the pattern of checks in the dimensions. Deepen the ability to develop feedback and suggestions that are criterion-based and accurately and specifically reflect the lesson/unit being reviewed.

1.CCSS: Members of a review team should be familiar with the CCSS. 2.Inquiry: We use guided discussion to emphasize inquiry rather than advocacy. 3.Respect & Commitment: Each member is respected as a colleague and contributor. 4.Criteria & Evidence: Feedback is criterion- and evidence-based. 5.Constructive: Materials are seen as “works in progress.” Reviewers respectfully provide constructive feedback. 6.Individual to Collective: Each member of a review team independently records his/her observations prior to discussion. 7.Understanding & Agreement: We aim to calibrate judgments and move toward agreement. EQuIP Quality Review: Principles & Agreements 4

EQuIP Quality Review Process The EQuIP quality review process centers on the use of criteria-based rubrics. The criteria are organized into four dimensions: The Four Dimensions We will generate evidence-based commentary and ratings to describe the quality and alignment of materials in each of these dimensions. EQuIP Quality Review: Process & Dimensions 5 Alignment to the depth of the CCSS Key shifts in the CCSS Instructional supports Assessment

Five Quality Review Steps Step 1. Review Materials Record the grade and title on the Rubric PDF. Scan for contents and organization. Read key materials. Work the central tasks. Think about the content and practices required in the task. 6

Five Quality Review Steps Step 2. Apply Criteria in Dimension I Closely examine the materials through the “lens” of each criterion: Indicate (check) each criterion for which clear and substantial evidence is found Record feedback on the criterion along with suggested improvements to strengthen alignment. Enter a rating of 0–3 for Dimension I 7 Alignment to the depth of the CCSS Key shifts in the CCSS Instructional supports Assessment

Giving Feedback Effective feedback is vital to the EQuIP Quality Review Process. Criterion-based: Written comments are based on the criteria used for review in each dimension. No extraneous comments are included. Evidence Cited: Written comments indicate that the reviewer looked for evidence of each criterion of a given dimension. Examples cite where and how the criteria are met or not met. Improvement Suggested: Improvements are specifically identified to meet criteria or strengthen the lesson or unit. Clear Communication: Written comment are constructed in a manner keeping with basic grammar, spelling, sentence structure and conventions.

Five Quality Review Steps Step 3. Apply Criteria in Dimensions II–IV Examine the lesson/unit through the “lens” of each criterion Indicate each criterion met, record feedback, and then rate 0–3 9 Alignment to the depth of the CCSS Key shifts in the CCSS Instructional supports Assessment

Five Quality Review Steps Step 4. Apply an Overall Rating and Provide Summary Comments Review the ratings for Dimensions I–IV, adding/clarifying comments as needed. The total score is the sum the dimension ratings. Record the total score and the corresponding overall rating (E, E/I, R, N). Provide summary comments for the overall rating on the Quality Review Rubric PDF. 10

Five Quality Review Steps Step 5. Compare Overall Ratings and Determine Next Steps Note the evidence cited to arrive at final ratings, summary comments, and similarities and differences among raters. Recommend the next steps for the lesson/unit. Provide recommendations for improvement to developers/teachers. 11

12 Step 1. Review Materials Step 2. Apply Criteria in Dimension I: Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS Step 3. Apply Criteria in Dimensions II–IV Step 4. Apply an Overall Rating and Provide Summary Comments Step 5. Compare Overall Ratings and Determine Next Steps Review: The 5 Steps

13 For the Visual Learner…

Five Quality Review Steps When working with a review team: Have a review plan that considers the experience and expertise of all team members. Team members may choose to compare individual ratings after each dimension or wait until each person has individually rated and recorded all input for Dimensions II–IV before beginning discussion. Individuals should record their overall rating prior to discussion. Adjustments to ratings and/or commentary can take place as a part of the group discussion. 14

15 Using Dimension Ratings and Descriptive Scales To Synthesize Judgment Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV: 3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension

16 Using Dimension Ratings and Descriptive Scales To Synthesize Judgment Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV: 3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension Descriptors for Dimensions I–IV: 3: Exemplifies CCSS Quality — meets the standard described by criteria in the dimension, as explained in criterion-based observations 2: Approaching CCSS Quality — meets many criteria but will benefit from revision in others, as suggested in criterion-based observations 1: Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations 0: Not representing CCSS Quality — does not address the criteria in the dimension

17 Using Dimension Ratings and Descriptive Scales To Synthesize Judgment Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV: 3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension Descriptors for Dimensions I–IV: 3: Exemplifies CCSS Quality — meets the standard described by criteria in the dimension, as explained in criterion-based observations 2: Approaching CCSS Quality — meets many criteria but will benefit from revision in others, as suggested in criterion-based observations 1: Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations 0: Not representing CCSS Quality — does not address the criteria in the dimension

18 Using Overall Ratings to Summarize Judgment Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit: E: Exemplar — Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in Dimensions II–IV (total 11–12) E/I: Exemplar if Improved — Aligned and needs some improvement in one or more dimensions (total 8–10) R: Revision Needed — Aligned partially and needs significant revision in one or more dimensions (total 3–7) N: Not Ready to Review — Not aligned and does not meet criteria (total 0–2)

21 The EQuIP Rubric for Mathematics

22 Grade 7 — Draft Unit Plan 7.NS.1-3: Operations with Rational Numbers This lesson is part of a unit plan titled “Operations with Rational Numbers.” The state that developed this unit plan uses the CCSS and the EQuIP rubrics to guide development of instructional materials and has charged its developers with creating overall conceptual unit plans, based on the CCSS domains, with one standards-based lesson, plus one or more lesson seeds, based on the cluster. Teachers are able to use these as models in their planning as they further develop the unit. Step 1. Review Materials

23 Step 1: Review Materials Try it now – on your own at first. Record the grade and title on the Rubric PDF: Scan for contents and organization. Read key materials. Work the central tasks. Think about the content and practices required in the task.

Step 1. Review Materials Key materials related to instruction, assessment and teacher guidance: −Unit overview narratives (pp. 1–3) −Unit alignment/standards (pp. 4–9) −Common misconceptions (p. 10) −Vocabulary (pp. 12–14) −Lesson plan and materials – 7.NS.1 (pp. 15–27) −Lesson seeds – 7.NS.1b, 7.NS.1d (pp. 28–32) Activities: −Four Corners (relating additive inverses to students’ lives) (p.16) −Gallery Walk (adding and subtraction whole and decimal numbers) (p.17, 25) −Rational Flow Chart (combining positive and negative decimals) (p.19, 27) −The Zero Circle and Block Party (Lesson Seeds : using ‘opposites’ to find zero) 24

25 For the Visual Learner… You Are Here

26 On to step 2!

27 Step 2, Dimension I Criteria The lesson/unit aligns with the letter and spirit of the CCSS:  Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full depth of the standards for teaching and learning  Standards for Mathematical Practice that are central to the lesson are identified, handled in a grade-appropriate way and well connected to the content being addressed  Presents a balance of mathematical procedures and deeper conceptual understanding inherent in the CCSS Discuss

28 Step 2, Dimension I

29 Step 2, Dimension I Apply 1. Try it now on your own. -Check the criterion. -Construct feedback. -Provide rating. 2. Discuss. 3. Compose the group response.

30 The lesson/unit aligns with the letter and spirit of the CCSS:  Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full depth of the standards for teaching and learning  Standards for Mathematical Practice that are central to the lesson are identified, handled in a grade-appropriate way and well connected to the content being addressed  Presents a balance of mathematical procedures and deeper conceptual understanding inherent in the CCSS Step 2, Dimension I, Criterion 1 Sample Response

31 Step 2 Dimension I Apply Share responses

32 Criterion:  1. Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full depth of the standards for teaching and learning Observations and suggestions: Step 2, Dimension I, Criterion 1 Sample Response 1.Criterion-based? 2.Evidence Cited? 3.Improvement Suggested? 4.Clear Communication? The lesson targets 7.NS.1a, b and d as the content standard for the lesson. The lesson does not list 7.NS.1c, although the lesson includes discussion of additive inverse. Developers should re-evaluate the omission of 7.NS.1c. It is assumed that further development of lessons beyond the two lesson seeds provided will address the requirements of 7.NS.2 and 7.NS.3.

33  2. Standards for Mathematical Practice that are central to the lesson are identified, handled in a grade-appropriate way and well connected to the content being addressed Observations and suggestions: Step 2, Dimension I, Criterion 2 Sample Response The lesson plan identifies all eight of the Practices as being addressed. Although references to the Practices are listed throughout the lesson/unit, it is not always clear which practices are the most central. Those central Practices should serve as a focal point for the lesson and those that are not central should either be eliminated or noted as serving in a supporting role. 1.Criterion-based? 2.Evidence Cited? 3.Improvement Suggested? 4.Clear Communication?

34  3. Presents a balance of mathematical procedures and deeper conceptual understanding inherent in the CCSS Observations and suggestions: The balance between mathematical procedures and conceptual understanding is acceptable in the unit. As refinements are made, and as the Lesson Seeds are more fully developed, care needs to be taken to ensure that this balance is maintained. Step 2. Dimension I, Criterion 3 Sample Response 1.Criterion-based? 2.Evidence Cited? 3.Improvement Suggested? 4.Clear Communication?

35 Rating: 2 (Missing clear connections between the Practices and the activities. Will benefit from some revision in this area.) Approaching CCSS Quality — meets many criteria but will benefit from revision in others, as suggested in criterion-based observations Step 2, Dimension I Sample Response:

36 Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Feedback and Rating What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked? Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials? Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the rubric? Step 2. Dimension I Reflection

37 Consider the rating for Dimension I: Is the overall rating for alignment a 3 or 2? Does the quality of the alignment to the CCSS warrant continuing with the review? If yes, continue with Dimensions II – IV. Step 2. Dimension I Reflection

39 On to step 3. Time to look at Dimension II. Step 3, Dimensions II – IV

40 Step 3, Dimension II Criteria The lesson/unit addresses key shifts in the CCSS:  Focus: Lessons and units targeting the major work of the grade provide an especially in-depth treatment, with especially high expectations. Lessons and units targeting supporting clusters have visible connection to the major work of the grade and are sufficiently brief. Lessons and units do not hold students responsible for material from later grades.  Coherence: The content develops through reasoning about the new concepts on the basis of previous understandings and provides opportunities for students to transfer knowledge and skills within and across domains and learning progressions.

41  Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance among the following: * Application: Provides opportunities for students to independently apply mathematical concepts in real-world situations and problem solve with persistence, choosing and applying an appropriate model or strategy to new situations Conceptual Understanding: Develops students’ conceptual understanding through tasks, brief problems, questions, multiple representations and opportunities for students to write and speak about their understanding. Procedural Skill and Fluency: Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately. Step 3, Dimension II Criteria

42 Step 3, Dimension II Apply Try it now – on your own at first.

43 Step 3, Dimension II Apply Share responses

44 Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response The lesson/unit addresses reflects evidence of key shifts that are reflected in the CCSS:  Focus: Lessons and units targeting the major work of the grade provide an especially in-depth treatment, with especially high expectations. Lessons and units targeting supporting clusters have visible connection to the major work of the grade and are sufficiently brief. Lessons and units do not hold students responsible for material from later grades.  Coherence: The content develops through reasoning about the new concepts on the basis of previous understandings and provides opportunities for students to transfer knowledge and skills within and across domains and learning progressions.  Rigor : Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance among the following o Application: Provides opportunities for students to independently apply mathematical concepts in real- world situations and problem solve with persistence, choosing and applying an appropriate model or strategy to new situations o Conceptual Understanding: Develops students’ conceptual understanding through tasks, brief problems, questions, multiple representations and opportunities for students to write and speak about their understanding. o Procedural Skill and Fluency : Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately

45 The lesson/unit addresses reflects evidence of key shifts that are reflected in the CCSS:  Focus: 7.NS.1 is part of the major work of the grade. There is, however, a lack of evidence of an especially in-depth treatment as 7.NS.1b is not fully addressed in the lesson. 7.NS.1c is part of the cluster but is not clearly evident, though it may be addressed in future lesson seeds to increase depth. The material does not go above the grade level.  Coherence: There are connections made to prior learning in the section on Vertical Alignment. There are other references among the UDL Components, the Overview and Teacher Notes. In the Enduring Understandings there is a hint at how the concepts of this unit will be carried forward. However, more information might be provided in how the rational number system will evolve from the learning in this unit. Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response

46  Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance among the following: *  Application: There is evidence of opportunity for application of some skills with the activities involving real-world context (card sort, gallery walk). However, many activities provide the opportunity for students to work in small groups or with partners, so there are few clear opportunities for independent application of concepts and skills to real-world contexts. Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response * NOTE: The EQuIP rubric does not provide the option to individually select the subcategories for rigor. We are addressing them in this way for training purposes.

47  Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance among the following: *  Application:  Conceptual Understanding: The guiding questions and other question prompts provide tools for teachers to probe for understanding. It is not clear, however, if all students will be expected to respond to questions verbally or in writing or if questions will be used solely to guide student discussion. Students are not presented with conceptual situations that require deeper thinking and persistence and that can provide an indication of deeper conceptual understanding. Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response * NOTE: The EQuIP rubric does not provide the option to individually select the subcategories for rigor. We are addressing them in this way for training purposes.

48  Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance among the following: *  Application:  Conceptual Understanding:  Procedural Skill and Fluency: The unit emphasizes some procedural skill and there are specific references in the unit to the development of fluency with operations with rational numbers as a goal of grade 7. However, it is not clear how much calculator usage is allowed, causing some concern as to how quickly and accurately students might perform calculations and procedures without this tool. Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response * NOTE: The EQuIP rubric does not provide the option to individually select the subcategories for rigor. We are addressing them in this way for training purposes.

49 Rating: 1 (Missing connections within the major content as well as rigorous application problems and opportunities for deep conceptual understanding. Revision will be required to fill these gaps.) Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations Step 3, Dimension II Sample Response

50 Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and Rating What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked? Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials? Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the rubric? Step 3, Dimension II Reflection

52 Continue Step 3: Shift to Dimension III

53 Step 3, Dimension III Criteria The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:  Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the targeted standards, including, when appropriate, the use of technology and media.  Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language, terminology, and concrete or abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols, expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline.  Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking questions, problems and tasks that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical thinking.  Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.

54 Step 3, Dimension III Criteria  Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and support for a broad range of learners. *  Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles.  Provides extra supports for students working below grade level.  Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade level. * Note: All three of these components are required in a high quality lesson or unit.

55 Step 3, Dimension III Criteria A unit or longer lesson should: longer lessons:  Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of learners such as using multiple representations (including models), using a range of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, pair-share, etc.  Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding independently.  Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts or skills advance and deepen over time.  Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately.

56 Step 3, Dimension III Apply Try it now – on your own at first.

57 Step 3, Dimension III Share responses

58 The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:  Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the targeted standards, including, when appropriate, the use of technology and media  Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language, terminology, and concrete or abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols, expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline  Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking questions, problems and tasks that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical thinking  Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use  Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and support for a broad range of learners  Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles  Provides extra supports for students working below grade level  Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade level A longer unit or lesson should:  Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of learners such as using multiple representations (including models), using a range of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, pair-share, etc.  Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding independently  Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts or skills advance and deepen over time  Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

59 The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:  Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the targeted standards, including, when appropriate, the use of technology and media There is sufficient guidance in this Draft Unit Plan to provide teachers the necessary support. The layout, format, and introduction are generally clear and helpful. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

60 The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:  Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language, terminology, and concrete or abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols, expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline The language used is generally accurate and grade-appropriate. However, there is some mathematical imprecision. Some elements of the tasks can be completed without attending to opposites or additive inverses. The reason for this seems to be that “Expressions of additive inverse simplify to zero” (p.17) is mistakenly applied as “Expressions that simplify to zero exemplify additive inverses.” A discussion question in Activity 2 asks about the sum of Ocean City and St. Mary’s. It is unclear what that question means, but a key discussion seems to hinge on this. It would be helpful to clarify this question and to clarify the distinction between subtraction and additive inverse. 7.NS.1c would help with this. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

61 The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:  Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking questions, problems and tasks that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical thinking Some questions posed in the unit are thought provoking and are likely to stimulate student interest and some mathematical thinking. However the level of response required does not indicate that they are likely to engage students in a productive struggle.  Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use The Possible Student Outcomes defined in the Draft Unit Plan help clearly define the instructional expectations. The varied questions and activities offered in the Model Lesson Plan provide teachers with a range of ways to address instructional expectations. The materials are user-friendly and generally easy to understand. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

62  Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and support for a broad range of learners  Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles  Provides extra supports for students working below grade level  Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade level There is not enough support for students working below grade level in the unit or those with language difficulties. The concepts presented in this unit might prove to be challenging for English-language learners, who would benefit from the use of manipulatives and visual supports to demonstrate their mathematical understanding independently. There are places in the unit where activities are listed for intervention (a video), extension (writing a rap song), and for ELL (using the Frayer method of writing definitions). It is not clear how these activities would support those students needing more support from this lesson. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

63 A unit or longer lesson should:  Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of learners such as using multiple representations (including models), using a range of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, pair-share, etc. The Model Lesson Plan presents a variety of instructional approaches including multiple representations, using a range of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, and think-pair-share.  Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding independently With little support provided to students with particular needs, it is not clear that there is a gradual move to independent learning. As students become more adept, over the course of the unit, supports can be removed strategically from some activities, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding independently. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

64 A unit or longer lesson should:  Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts or skills advance and deepen over time The unit may present an effective sequence and progression of learning when the lesson seeds are built out with the emphasis on 7.NS.1b and 7.NS.1d. Attention to 7.NS.1c would help to build a solid progression of learning.  Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately Procedural skill and fluency might come later in the unit but it looks like it will require work in the lesson seeds. Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

65 Rating: 1 (Missing strategies for engaging students in productive struggle, support for diverse learners, and gradual removal of support with an emphasis on independent understanding. Including all of these supports would require significant revision of the unit.) Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations Step 3, Dimension III Sample Response

66 Step 3, Dimension III Reflection Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and Rating What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked? Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials? Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the rubric?

67 Continue Step 3. Shift to Dimension IV

68 Step 3, Dimension IV Criteria The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based content and skills:  Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS.  Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased, including the use of grade-level language in student prompts.  Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance. In addition, for units and longer lessons: and longer lessons:  Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include pre-, formative, summative and self-assessment measures.

69 Step 3, Dimension IV Apply Try it now – on your own at first.

70 Step 3, Dimension IV Share responses

71 The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based content and skills:  Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS  Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased, including the use of grade-level language in student prompts  Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance In addition, for units and longer lessons: and longer lessons:  Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include pre-, formative, summative and self-assessment measures Step 3, Dimension IV Sample Response

72 The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based content and skills:  Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS This lesson includes a readiness assessment but no formative or end-of-lesson assessment to determine the degree to which students can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS. An observation checklist for the teacher to use when observing students working collaboratively with others would be helpful, as would adding opportunities for independent demonstration of understanding and skill.  Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased, including the use of grade-level language in student prompts Since there aren’t actual assessment tasks, there is no evidence for this criterion. Step 3, Dimension IV Sample Response

73  Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance Answer keys are provided for some, but not all, of the student activities. (This feature will be very helpful for teachers but reviewers suggested that in some cases an answer key could be more fully developed.) In addition, for units and longer lessons:  Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include pre-, formative, summative and self-assessment measures This Unit Plan includes reference to a variety of types of curriculum embedded assessment, including a readiness or pre-assessment, formative assessments, and an Exit Ticket assessment as a closure activity. At this point, no culminating summative assessment is identified for the end of the unit, although such may be intended for the Sample Assessment Items section. The unit could be strengthened by adding a rigorous summative assessment. Step 3, Dimension IV Sample Response

74 Rating: 1 (Missing a rigorous summative assessment that is supported by other assessment opportunities throughout the lesson/unit.) Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations Step 3, Dimension IV Sample Response

75 Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and Rating What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked? Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials? Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the rubric? Step 3, Dimension IV Reflection

77 Step 4. Overall Rating and Summary Comments Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit: E: Exemplar — Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in dimensions II–IV (total 11–12) E/I: Exemplar if Improved — Aligned and needs some improvement in one or more dimensions (total 8–10) R: Revision Needed — Aligned partially and needs significant revision in one or more dimensions (total 3–7) N: Not Ready to Review — Not aligned and does not meet criteria (total 0–2)

78 Step 4 Apply Try it now – on your own at first.

79 Step 4 Apply Share responses

80 Step 4 Sample Response 80 RATING: 2111 R – Revision Needed While this lesson plan needs improvement, it has great potential. The lesson plan offers numerous and varied opportunities for the skillful teacher to engage students in content, but the less-skilled teacher will need more guidance. All teachers would benefit from an instructional resource that demonstrates stronger alignment (including clear identification of the Standards for Mathematics Practice that are most central to the activities) and the addition of assessments that will provide clear evidence as to whether individual students grasp the knowledge, skills and conceptual understandings that are addressed in the unit. Supports for students with disabilities and English language learners will strengthen the lesson.

81 Step 5 Compare Summary Comments and Determine Next Steps Compare overall ratings and synthesize feedback: How do our overall ratings compare? Does this example serve as a model of CCSS instruction? What are its strengths? Areas for improvement? What are our next steps with this material?

82 Reflection on Session Goals Did we … Develop a common understanding of the EQuIP process, dimensions, criteria, and ratings? Learn to use the EQuIP process to rate and provide feedback on the alignment of instructional materials to the Common Core State Standards?

Achieve www.achieve.org 1400 16th Street, NW / Suite 510 Washington, DC 20036 83

85 Review: The 4 Dimensions Alignment to the depth of the CCSS Key shifts in the CCSS Instructional supports Assessment

86 Review: The 4 Dimensions Alignment to the depth of the CCSS Key shifts in the CCSS Instructional supports Assessment

Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Mathematics EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review Training Washington, DC February 11, 2015 1."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback