Preparing for Enactment

Teach! Coursework

Preparing for Enactment | Postwork Rubric

Pre-Observation Preparation Document (50%)

Pre-Observation Conference Template 0 Points 0 Points 1 Point 2 Points 3 Points 4 Points

To-Be-Remembered Information Objectives are:

● Measurable ● Explicit ● Aligned to the depth and rigor of the state standards ● Focused on the lesson’s to-be-remembered information

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Objectives are misaligned, incomplete, or unfocused.

To-be-remembered content is unclear or missing.

Objectives are present but may be vague, partially measurable, or loosely aligned to the rigor

or depth of the standard.

Objectives are measurable and mostly aligned to the standard. They reflect the core content but may lack precision or full

clarity.

Objectives are clear, measurable, and fully aligned to the rigor of the standard. They precisely capture the

to-be-remembered information and are phrased to

guide instruction and assessment.

Connecting to Prior Knowledge ● Pre-requisite skills are aligned and logically sequenced to

the lesson’s major objective ● Teacher displays extensive content knowledge and

understanding of both state standards and high-quality instructional materials, including their adopted or approved curriculum

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Connections are unclear or inaccurate. Evidence of content or curricular understanding is

limited.

Skills are loosely related or not clearly sequenced. Teacher

demonstrates partial or surface-level understanding.

Prerequisite skills are appropriate and logical. Teacher shows general

understanding of content and curriculum.

Prerequisite skills are accurately identified and

sequenced. Teacher insightfully explains connections to the

objective, demonstrating deep content knowledge and

curricular alignment.

Evidence of Student Mastery ● Aligned to the rigor and depth of the standards and

curriculum ● Expectations for each student’s performance are clear,

demanding, and high

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Mastery expectations are unclear, low-level, or missing.

Alignment is poor.

Criteria are somewhat vague or basic. Expectations are not

fully aligned or may not reflect rigorous outcomes.

Expectations are clear and mostly rigorous. They reflect

the standard but may not push all students to the highest

level.

Mastery expectations are specific, rigorous, and tightly

aligned to standard and curriculum. Expectations are

clearly articulated and demand critical thinking.

Depth of Processing ● Students engage in effortful thinking for the majority of

the lesson. ● The teacher prompts students to analyze, justify, and

provide detailed explanations of concepts, processes, and thinking each time they encounter elements of to-be-remembered content.

● Students’ attention, writing, and discourse are focused on the meaning of to-be-remembered content and NOT other things.

● Students have opportunities to map explicit connections between varied examples and explicit distinctions between examples and non-examples.

● All students are prompted to effortfully think about the to-be-remembered information.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Plan lacks meaningful effortful thinking or deep processing. Few or no structures support

analysis or justification. Student engagement is likely

passive.

Some effortful thinking is attempted, but prompts may

be limited to surface-level questions or inconsistently

connected to the to-be-remembered content.

Planning may overlook student variability.

Students are prompted to engage in effortful thinking at

key points. Most prompts promote justification or

explanation. Examples/non-examples may

be present but underdeveloped. Engagement of all learners is considered,

though not fully ensured.

Plan demonstrates a comprehensive approach to fostering deep processing. Students are expected to

analyze, justify, and explain the to-be-remembered content

consistently. The plan includes comparisons of

examples/non-examples and provides structures to engage

all learners in effortful thinking.

Preparing for Enactment | Postwork Rubric 1

Teach! Coursework

Effortful Thinking Questions ● Teacher questions are varied and high-quality, providing

an appropriate mix of question types based on content: ○ Knowledge and comprehension ○ Application and analysis ○ Creation and evaluation

● Questions are consistently purposeful and coherent ● The frequency of questions consistently engages students

in the rigor of the content and in critical thinking ● Questions are consistently sequenced with attention to

the instructional goals

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Questions are low-level, generic, or disconnected from

the to-be-remembered content. There is little attempt

to engage students in meaningful thinking.

Some effort is made to include rigorous questions, but they are inconsistently aligned,

superficial, or lack purposeful sequence. Critical thinking may

be limited to isolated moments.

Includes multiple question types that align to content. Sequencing supports rigor,

though some questions may be missed or lack full depth.

Planning shows clear intent to engage students in

higher-order thinking.

Includes a well-sequenced set of varied, high-quality

questions that match the instructional goals and content. Questions are

purposefully designed to provoke sustained, critical

thinking and are distributed frequently throughout the

lesson.

Scaffolding ● Teacher identifies points in the lesson that will cause

cognitive overload and provides scaffolding strategies that will support student understanding.

● When students encounter multiple, not-yet-mastered components of content at a time, they have access to instructional scaffolds such as models, explanations, worked examples, and think-alouds.

● Teacher optimizes instructional support which can include: gradual release, chunking, guided questioning, or bringing in scaffolding instructional tools.

● Supports enable students to engage in to-be-remembered content.

● Students’ individual needs are attended to, and pacing provides many opportunities for individual students who progress at different learning rates.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Minimal scaffolding is evident. Supports are vague or poorly

matched to student needs and do not support content access.

Scaffolds are included but may be generic or misaligned with points of difficulty. Supports

are inconsistently applied and may not address the needs of

diverse learners.

Identifies logical points of student difficulty and includes aligned scaffolds. Supports are

appropriate and generally well-sequenced. Some

attention is given to individual needs or pacing.

Thoroughly anticipates areas of cognitive load and matches them with precise scaffolds.

Strategies are varied, well-sequenced, and flexible enough to meet individual

student needs. Instructional supports are tightly aligned to

the lesson’s content and designed to be gradually

released.

Data Analysis ● Lesson plan includes criteria that clarify how students can

be successful. ● Criteria for success are aligned to state standards and

aligned HQIM, both in content and in rigor.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Criteria are minimal, unclear, or misaligned. They do not

support meaningful analysis of student understanding.

Criteria are vague or loosely aligned with expectations.

They may not clearly define success or support accurate

interpretation of student performance.

Criteria are present and generally aligned with

standards and curriculum. They support data collection but

may lack full clarity or specificity.

Success criteria are specific, rigorous, and tightly aligned to both the standards and HQIM.

They clarify what mastery looks like and support precise

data collection and instructional decisions.

Lesson Plan 0 Points 0 Points 1 Point 2 Points 3 Points 4 Points

Academic Vocabulary ● Selected words are necessary for student success and are

directly related to the to-be-remembered information of the lesson

● Definitions are provided in student-friendly terms ● Vocabulary are used throughout the lesson

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Vocabulary is irrelevant, incomplete, or missing. Terms are not clearly connected to

the core learning.

Terms are included but may be unnecessary, undefined, or inconsistently used. Some definitions may be overly technical or unclear for

students.

Selected vocabulary terms are appropriate and defined

clearly. Terms are referenced in multiple parts of the lesson.

Some missed opportunities to reinforce them may exist.

Vocabulary terms are carefully selected, clearly defined in

student-friendly language, and intentionally embedded

throughout the lesson. Terms are essential to understanding

the lesson’s key content.

Preparing for Enactment | Postwork Rubric 2

Teach! Coursework

Activities, materials, and assessments that provide appropriate time for student work, student reflection, and lesson closure

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Activities, materials, or assessments are incomplete, unaligned, or fail to support

student reflection or closure.

Timing is uneven or rushed. Materials or activities may lack

alignment. Reflection or closure are present but unclear

or disconnected.

Timing and materials support student work and reflection.

Closure is planned but may be underdeveloped. Most parts are aligned to the learning

goal.

Activities, materials, and assessments are strategically timed and support student reflection and closure. Each component is meaningfully

connected to the lesson goal and to-be-remembered

content.

Opportunities for student-to-student interaction Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Opportunities for student interaction are minimal,

off-topic, or not aligned with content. Interactions do not support meaningful learning.

Interaction is included but may be infrequent or shallow.

Students may not all participate or may be unclear on the purpose of discussion.

Student interaction is planned and purposeful. Opportunities

exist for students to discuss and reflect, though not all

moments are maximized for deep thinking.

Interaction structures are intentionally embedded to

promote discourse and peer thinking. All students are

expected to engage meaningfully with one another

to process and extend understanding of core content.

Introduction to new material that: ● Contains specificity and breaks material down to granular

level ● Visuals including student work exemplars, that establish

the purpose of the lesson, preview the organization of the lesson, and include internal summaries of the lesson

● Examples, illustrations, analogies and labels for new concepts and ideas

● Modeling by the teacher that demonstrates accurate understanding of the content and meets performance expectations

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Introduction is underdeveloped, unclear, or

disconnected from lesson goals. Few supports are present to make content

accessible.

Introduction is present but lacks clarity or depth. Visuals, modeling, or examples may be missing, generic, or misaligned.

Students may struggle to access the content.

Lesson includes structured introduction to new content

with relevant visuals or modeling. Some components (e.g., examples or summaries) may be partially developed or

inconsistently applied.

New material is introduced with clarity and specificity.

Visuals, analogies, and modeling are used

purposefully to make content accessible. Internal summaries support student understanding

throughout.

Numerous opportunities to practice the to-be-remembered information

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Few or no structured opportunities to practice are

evident. Practice tasks may be misaligned or surface-level.

Practice is present but may be limited in frequency, variety, or

depth. Alignment to core content is inconsistent.

Multiple opportunities to practice are present and

generally aligned with the lesson’s objective. Some

chances to deepen or extend practice may be missed.

Practice opportunities are frequent, varied, and

intentionally designed to reinforce the

to-be-remembered content. Students engage in meaningful

application throughout the lesson.

Practice is low stakes and acts as an assessment “as” learning

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Practice is high-stakes or disconnected from the

instructional goal. There is little to no evidence of reflection,

adjustment, or formative use.

Practice is present but may be summative in nature or lacks a clear formative purpose. Data

is collected but not clearly used to inform instruction.

Practice is low-stakes and used to check understanding. Some adjustments to instruction or

student reflection occur, though not consistently.

Practice is thoughtfully designed as low-stakes and is

used consistently to assess understanding and adjust

instruction. All students are supported to reflect and revise

their thinking.

Preparing for Enactment | Postwork Rubric 3

Teach! Coursework

Rehearsal (50%)

0 Points 0 Points 1 Point 2 Points 3 Points 4 Points

During the video recording, teacher restates the question as part of the answer.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Rarely or never restates the question. Responses may be

unclear or miss the opportunity to model

expectations.

Inconsistently restates questions or does so in a way

that lacks clarity or tone. Modeling may be weak or

incomplete.

Often restates questions in answers, with occasional

inconsistency. Responses are generally clear and aligned to

expectations.

Consistently restates questions as part of clear, modeled

answers. Responses reinforce academic tone and help

students internalize how to construct strong responses.

Teacher displays extensive content knowledge and understanding of both state standards and high-quality instructional materials, including their adopted or approved curriculum.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Demonstrates misunderstanding or limited

grasp of content and standards. Instruction may contain errors or confusion.

Content knowledge is partial or occasionally inaccurate.

Connections to curriculum or standards may be underdeveloped.

Demonstrates general accuracy and understanding. Models align with curriculum and

standards but may lack full clarity or depth.

Displays deep understanding of the content and how it

connects to the standards and curriculum. Models are

accurate and well-aligned.

Teacher consistently implements a variety of subject-specific instructional strategies to enhance student content knowledge.

Unusable Submission

No Attempt or Action

Instructional strategies are missing or poorly executed.

Students are unlikely to benefit from rehearsal as modeled.

Attempts to use strategies but they may be general,

inconsistent, or only partially effective in supporting student

learning.

Uses instructional strategies aligned to the lesson and content. Implementation

supports student learning, with room to refine execution.

Uses a variety of high-leverage, subject-specific strategies to

support understanding. Rehearsal reflects clear instructional intent and

student-centered design.

Writing Quality (5%)

0 Points 0 Points 2 Points 4 Points

Clarity & Organization: Ideas are clear and organized

Unusable Submission Unclear and most information is disorganized

Some disorganization and/or individual sentences lack clarity

Presented in an organized way and communicated clearly

Spelling & Grammar: Error-free writing leads to credibility & trust

Unusable Submission Many grammatical and/or spelling errors that impede the reader's

ability to understand

Some grammatical or spelling errors, but the reader can generally

understand

Free of errors

Preparing for Enactment | Postwork Rubric 4