Faculty Instructional Rubric

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project-Based vs. Text-Based
Advertisements

Understanding by Design Stage 3
Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluation Guidelines. The single most influential component of an effective school is the individual teachers within that school.
The Teacher Work Sample
C Domain Teaching for Student Learning. The focus in the C Domain is on the act of teaching and its overall goal of helping students connect with the.
Focus on Instructional Support
PORTFOLIO.
Understanding Social Constructivism. Vygotsky and Language Language and actions are mediation tools used for learning (Wink & Putney, 2002). Language.
California Standards for the Teaching Profession
Training Module for Cooperating Teachers and Supervising Faculty
The “Highly Effective” Early Childhood Classroom Environment
Understanding the EPC Rating rubrics
Providing Constructive Feedback
7/14/20151 Effective Teaching and Evaluation The Pathwise System By David M. Agnew Associate Professor Agricultural Education.
Rationale for CI 2300 Teaching and Learning in the Digital Age.
What should be the basis of
performance INDICATORs performance APPRAISAL RUBRIC
Matt Moxham EDUC 290. The Idaho Core Teacher Standards are ten standards set by the State of Idaho that teachers are expected to uphold. This is because.
STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LEARNING IN A GLOBAL NETWORK UNIVERSITY INTED 2013 Annette Smith, Kristopher Moore, Erica Osher Reifer New York University.
National Center for Urban School Transformation Strengthening Instruction in Urban Schools National Center for Urban School Transformation.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC)
Conceptual Framework for the College of Education Created by: Dr. Joe P. Brasher.
The Framework for Teaching Domain 1 Planning and Preparation.
Sheltered Instruction Part III of III Presented by Office of English Language Learners
Integrating Differentiated Instruction & Understanding by Design: Connecting Content and Kids by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe.
Supporting and Coaching Classroom Facilitators Oudete Taylor August 13, 2015.
Lesson Planning SIOP.
DVC Essay #2. The Essay  Read the following six California Standards for Teachers.  Discuss each standard and the elements that follow them  Choose.
Instructional Strategies Teacher Knowledge, Understanding, and Abilities The online teacher knows and understands the techniques and applications of online.
Teaching Strategies Equity in the Classroom. An Overview Defining equity in the classroom Meeting basic needs first Identifying some best practices –
Curriculum and Instruction: Management of the Learning Environment
1 Far West Teacher Center Network - NYS Teaching Standards: Your Path to Highly Effective Teaching 2013 Far West Teacher Center Network Teaching is the.
Wilkinsburg School District Literacy Development Framework May 2011.
Inquiry Road Map A Guidance System for 21 st Century Learning By Mary Ratzer.
FLORIDA EDUCATORS ACCOMPLISHED PRACTICES Newly revised.
Teaching and Learning Cycle and Differentiated Instruction A Perfect Fit Rigor Relevance Quality Learning Environment Differentiation.
NM Teacher Evaluation Planning & Preparation Creating an Environment of Learning Professionalism Teaching for Learning Evaluation.
Summative Evaluation Shasta Davis. Dimension: Preparation (Score- 4) Plans for instructional strategies that encourage the development of critical thinking,
Common Core.  Find your group assignment.  As a group, read over the descriptors for mastery of this standard. (The writing standards apply to more.
Standard One: Engaging & Supporting All Students in Learning
COMMON CORE FOR THE NOT-SO-COMMON LEARNER
Data Collection with Forms For Special Education
Measuring Growth Mindset in the Classroom
Instructional Design Groundwork:
NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT and PROCESS
INCLUSIVE PRACTICES Co-Teaching Models
An Overview of the EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
Iowa Teaching Standards & Criteria
Instructional Designer
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
Chapter 4 Planning in the Problem-Based Classroom
What to include in your Portfolio؟
Strategies and Techniques
Fall 2017 Data Summit Welcome!.
An Overview of the EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
Evaluating the Quality of Student Achievement Objectives
california Standards for the Teaching Profession
Title III Federal Programs Professional Development Series August 2018
WHAT IS CONNECT?.
Lesson Planning Designing Effective Practices
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
Assessing educational/training competencies of trainers of trainers
Project-Based Learning Integrating 21st Century Skills
Designing and delivering a learner centred curriculum
UDL Guidelines.
CLASS KeysTM Module 6: Informal Observations Spring 2010
HOW TO CONDUCT EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS
Presented by: Jenni DelVecchio, Renee Mathis, and Kevin Powell
Instructional Plan and Presentation Cindy Douglas Cur/516: Curriculum Theory and Instructional Design November 7, 2016 Professor Gary Weiss.
Dr. Sheri Conklin; Erika Hanson, Ginu Easow & Zach Morgan
Presentation transcript:

Faculty Instructional Rubric Teaching Effectiveness

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 1: Planning for Attendee Outcomes Component 1: Utilize Course Feedback Data Level 3 (Above Standard) Level 2 (Expected Standard) Level 1 (Below Standard) Faculty fulfills Level 2 criteria and sets yearly improvement goals based on feedback results Faculty utilizes attendee feedback to improve instructional delivery Faculty rarely or never uses prior attendee feedback to formulate course delivery plans Component 2: Objective Driven Instructional Plans Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Faculty fulfills Level 2 and anticipates needs for differentiated strategies based on attendee levels Faculty utilizes the learning objectives to align related speaking points, topics, and activities for the course/event Faculty does not align speaking points, topics, and activities of the course with the identified learning objectives

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 2: Effective Instruction Component 1: Utilizing Course Objectives Level 3 (Above Standard) Level 2 (Expected Standard) Level 1 (Below Standard) In addition to Level 2, course objectives are highlighted and connected to topics throughout the course. Course objectives are visually and verbally referenced during the course Course objectives are not provided or referenced to attendees during the course Faculty utilizes additional and/or altered objectives to maximize learner performance & confidence

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 2: Effective Instruction Component 2: Clearly Demonstrates and Communicates Content Knowledge Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 In addition to Level 2 attributes: faculty explains content/concepts and answers questions in a direct and efficient manner, while still achieving understanding Faculty demonstrates and communicates confidence and knowledge Faculty does not demonstrate or communicate confidence in their presentation about the topic Faculty is able to effectively connect course content to other topics and prior knowledge Faculty presentation is clear, concise, and well organized Faculty presentation lacks clarity and has organizational gaps Faculty anticipates critical learning needs and adjusts instruction to maximize learning Faculty emphasizes critical learning elements of the content Faculty does not emphasize critical learning elements

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 2: Effective Instruction Component 3: Engaging Course Attendees in the Content Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 In addition to Level 2 attributes: faculty finds ways to engage attendees on an individual level Faculty provides multiple ways to engage attendees in the content that reflect varied learning modalities Faculty only provides one way of engaging attendees Faculty effectively integrates technology as a tool to engage attendees Faculty adjusts the course delivery to accommodate attendee learning needs Faculty does not adequately adjust the course to address attendee learning needs Faculty provides opportunities for attendees to present ideas, perspectives, and/or conclusions to content topics Attendees are actively drawn into the course as participants Some attendees are not drawn into the course conversation/activities and remain passive listeners Faculty utilizes good energy and vocal clarity to maintain attendee interest Faculty demonstrates a flat affect or are difficult to understand or hear

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 2: Effective Instruction Component 4: Checking for Understanding Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 In addition to Level 2 attributes: Faculty checks for understanding at key points to determine learning progression Faculty never or rarely checks for understanding of key points Faculty checks for understanding at higher levels by asking scaffolding questions that push thinking Faculty utilizes a variety of methods by which to gage attendee’ understanding Faculty moves on in content before check for understanding Faculty utilizes effective open-ended questions to encourage higher level thinking and to reveal misunderstandings Faculty provides opportunity for attendee to ask questions before continuing in content , provides wait time, and/or assistance in helping attendees formulate responses Faculty never or rarely provides opportunity for attendee questions or frequently provides the answer rather than assisting attendees to think through their response

Faculty Instructional Rubric Domain 2: Effective Instruction Component 5: Create a Culture of Respect and Collaboration Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 In addition to Level 2 attributes: Faculty promotes respect of self and attendees Faculty is disrespectful of attendee opinions and/or allows other attendees to show disrespect Attendees initiate unprompted collaboration and assistance in the course Faculty has a good rapport with attendees and shows genuine interest in their thoughts, opinions, and/or questions Faculty has little rapport with attendees and shows minimal interest in their thoughts, opinions , and/or questions Faculty provides positive feedback to attendee questions Faculty provides no or non-constructive feedback to attendees Faculty provides a professional environment in which attendees can collaborate and ask questions freely Faculty does not provide an environment in which attendees feel free to collaborate and answer questions