1. An Overview of the EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
Dana Cartier
ISBE Content Area Specialist
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

2. Objectives
To use the EQuIP Rubric to provide quality feedback and adapt lessons to align to the CCSSM.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

3. These Standards are not intended to be new
names for old ways of doing business. They are
a call to take the next step. It is time for states
to work together to build on lessons learned
from two decades of standards based reforms.
It is time to recognize that standards are not
just promises to our children, but promises we
intend to keep.
— CCSS (2010, p.5)
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

4. EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
EQuIP stands for Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products
Derived from the Tri-State Rubric
Math and ELA Versions
ISBE is participating on this multi-state effort  
The EQuIP rubric is derived from the Tri-State Rubric as was released 2/25/13.
The Quality Review Rubric for Mathematics has been created by the Tri-State Collaborative including educational leaders from Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island, with the facilitation of Achieve.
Two separate criterion-based rubrics were created to evaluate the quality of lessons and units intended to address the CCSS for Mathematics and ELA/Literacy.
ISBE will be participating with Achieve on a multi-state effort to identify exemplar tasks, lessons, and units aligned to the CCSS.  Many items are available, but the degree of rigor and quality differ.  As a state, Illinois wants to engage in a system to build the capacity of educators to evaluate the quality of instructional materials for use in their classrooms. 
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

5. Not expected to be able to read, just to reference.
Explain that they can use this to assess the tasks – their own and others.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

6. Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

7. The Rubric
Scan the lesson packet to see what it contains and how it is organized.
Read key materials in the packet, particularly those related to the alignment of its instruction and
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

8. Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson targets and compare its focus and expectations to those of the CCSS
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

9. I. Alignment to the CCSS The lesson aligns with the CCSS:
Content standard(s)
Standards for Mathematical Practice
Balance of procedures and understanding.
Dimension I is non-negotiable.
Review only continues if Dimension I is rated a 2 or 3.
This is the first column of the four-column rubric.
Point out underlined points.
content, practice, balance.
Targets a set of grade level mathematics standard(s) at the level of rigor in the CCSS 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.
On page 2, under step 2 the requirements are clearly stated to continue the review process dimension I must receive a 2 or 3 rating.
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

10. Read key materials in the packet, particularly those related to the alignment of its instruction and assessment.
Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson targets and compare its focus and expectations to those of the targeted CCSS
Work the student tasks provided with the lesson/unit, keeping in mind all possible strategies students might use.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

11. Analyze the lesson/unit for evidence of Column I
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

12. Analyze the lesson/unit for evidence of Column I
Check the criteria in Column I for which there is clear and substantial evidence of meeting the descriptors.
Examine the lesson/unit through the “lens” of the criteria
Check the criteria that are met
Provide input on improvements needed to meet the criteria
It points out what the lesson is doing well and offers specific information to guide improvement.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

13. Provide input on improvements needed to meet the criteria
It points out what the lesson is doing well and offers specific information to guide improvement.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

14. II. Key Areas of Focus Focus Coherence Rigor Application
Conceptual Understanding
Procedural Skill and Fluency
Talking about 2nd column of 4-column rubric.
Focus is the critical area for that grade-level. Coherence, do they connect to the current knowledge of the students. No double star.
Rigor – no double star.
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

15. Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

16. III. Instructional Support
Responsive to varied student learning needs, including:
Clear and sufficient guidance
Precise and accurate mathematics
Relevant, thought‐provoking questions
Instructional Expectations
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

17. III. Instructional Support (cont.)
Differentiation:
Diverse cultures
Below grade level
Above grade level
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

18. III. Instructional Support (cont.)
For a longer lesson/unit
Mix of instructional approaches
Gradual removal of supports
Effective sequence/progression
Procedural skill and fluency
Dangers of scaffolding
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

19. -Clear and sufficient guidance – provides ipads and other technology sources. Allows the students to make decisions on tools.
Definitely requires precise language. Encourages the possibility of multiple representations.
Definitely thought provoking and relevant.
The explanation and the teachers support seem to give teacher guidance. Is there some missing?
Little differentiation.
No diverse cultures.
Allows multiple entrance points for students working below and above grade level. Students can do guess and check, tables, basic reasoning, or a quadratic equation. Students that come up with a quick solution are asked to provide proof that there answer is the most correct.
Not a longer unit.
- No mulitple instructional approaches.
Somewhat gradually removes support
Has somewhat sequence
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

20. IV. Assessment Independently demonstrated, observable evidence
Accessible and unbiased methods
Scoring guidelines
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

21. IV. Assessment For a longer lesson/unit Use varied modes of assessment
Pre-assessment
Formative
Summative
Self-assessment
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

22. Most work is in groups. Last text is individual
Most work is in groups. Last text is individual. Is this enough evidence.
Seems like this is grade-level appropriate and unbiased.
No rubrics, answer keys, or scoring guidelines.
Not a unit or longer, but definitely no embedded assessment that may include pre- formative summative and self-assessment measures.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

23. Overall Rating Scale
E: Exemplar Lesson/Unit – Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in dimensions II, III, IV (total 11-12)
E/I: Exemplar if Improved – Aligned and needs some improvement in one or more dimensions (total 8-10).
R: Needs Revision – Aligned partially and needs significant revision in one or more dimensions (total 3-7).
N: Not Recommended – Not aligned and does not meet the criteria (total 0-2).
Quality Rubric created by the Tri-State Collaborative (Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island) – facilitated by Achieve 2/21/2012
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

24. How to Use the Rubric within your School
Consider what teachers already know
Consider what faculty need to know before they see the rubric.
Consider the difficulties that a faculty member may have looking at the rubric.
Consider the resources that can be used to help with the transition.
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

25. Next Steps From today, what can you bring back to your school?
How will you use it to influence future professional development?
What is the implication on student learning?
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License