Benchmark - Reviving the Professional Culture

Benchmark - Reviving the Professional Culture - Rubric

Scenario Summary 15 points

Criteria Description

Scenario Summary

5. Target 15 points

Summary of existing school culture is effectively presented, emphasizes the most

important issues, and adds thoughtful, relevant detail to clarify the scenario.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

Summary of existing school culture is clear, addresses key issues, and adds useful

detail to clarify the scenario.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

Summary of existing school culture includes some key issues and fills in some

additional details to clarify the scenario, but is missing important elements.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

Summary of existing school culture is overly simplistic and missing several key

elements. Any additional details provided do little to enhance the clarity of the

situation.

1. No Submission 0 points

Mission, Vision, and Outcomes 30 points

Criteria Description

Mission, Vision, and Outcomes

5. Target 30 points

Mission and vision statements are eloquent and ideal for the school, students, and

community described in the scenario. At least two short-term and two long-term

outcomes are provided that are specific, measureable, exceptional for the given

scenario, and well-crafted for ensuring that individual student needs inform all

aspects of schooling.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Collapse All

Mission and vision statements are clear and appropriate for the school, students,

and community described in the scenario. At least two short-term and two long-

term outcomes are provided that are specific, largely measureable, appropriate for

the given scenario, and generally ensure that student needs inform all aspects of

schooling.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Summary of existing school culture includes some key issues and fills in some

additional details to clarify the scenario, but is missing important elements.Mission

and vision statements are overly broad or overly detailed and may not be clearly

connected to the school, students, and community described in the scenario. At

least four outcomes are provided, but outcomes may not clearly include two short-

term and two long-term outcomes. Outcome statements are broad, missing some

specificity, and may not be sufficiently measureable. Outcome statements relate to

scenario, but may not reflect most important elements. Outcomes only partially

ensure that student needs inform all aspects of schooling.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Mission and vision statements are unclear or inappropriate for the school, students,

Collaborating for Data (B) 30 points

Criteria Description

Collaborating for Data (C4.1)

5. Target 30 points

Plan skillfully outlines how collaboration between leadership, faculty/staff, students’

families, and other community members will be promoted and allow for the

collection and analysis of information pertinent to the improvement of the school's

educational environment and student-centered culture.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Plan soundly outlines how collaboration between leadership, faculty/staff, students’

families, and other community members will occur and allow for the collection and

analysis of information pertinent to the improvement of the school's educational

environment and student-centered culture.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Plan ambiguously outlines how collaboration between leadership, faculty/staff,

students’ families, and other community members will occur. Details on how the

collaboration will assist with the collection and analysis of information pertinent to

the improvement of the school's educational environment and student-centered

culture is inexplicit.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Plan ineffectively outlines how collaboration between leadership, faculty/staff,

students’ families, and other community members will occur. Details on how the

collaboration will assist with the collection and analysis of information pertinent to

the improvement of the school's educational environment and student-centered

culture is insufficient

Productive Family Relationships (B) 45 points

Criteria Description

Productive Family Relationships (C4.3)

5. Target 45 points

Plan describes thoughtful methods for leadership to use to respond to the interests

of students’ families/caregivers by building and sustaining positive school

relationships with them.

4. Acceptable 39.15 points

Plan describes reasonable methods for leadership to use to respond to the

interests of students’ families/caregivers by building and sustaining positive school

relationships with them.

3. Approaching 33.3 points

Plan describes underdeveloped methods for leadership to use to respond to the

interests of students’ families/caregivers by building and sustaining positive school

relationships with them.

2. Insufficient 31.05 points

Plan describes unreasonable methods for leadership to use to respond to the

interests of students’ families/caregivers by building and sustaining positive school

relationships with them.

Productive Community Partnerships (B) 30 points

Criteria Description

Productive Community Partnerships (C4.4)

5. Target 30 points

Plan describes thoughtful methods for leadership to use to respond to community

interests by building and sustaining productive school relationships with

community partners.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Plan describes reasonable methods for leadership to use to respond to community

interests by building and sustaining productive school relationships with

community partners.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Plan describes underdeveloped methods for leadership to use to respond to

community interests by building and sustaining productive school relationships

with community partners.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Plan describes unreasonable methods for leadership to use to respond to

community interests by building and sustaining productive school relationships

with community partners.

Public Advocacy (B) 30 points

Criteria Description

Public Advocacy (C.6.1)

5. Target 30 points

Plan describes insightful methods for leadership to advocate publicly for the needs

and priorities of students, families, and the community.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Plan describes significant methods for leadership to advocate publicly for the needs

and priorities of students, families, and the community.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Plan describes weak methods for leadership to advocate publicly for the needs and

priorities of students, families, and the community.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Plan describes insufficient methods for leadership to advocate publicly for the

needs and priorities of students, families, and the community.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Rationales (B) 30 points

Criteria Description

Rationales (C.5.5)

5. Target 30 points

Plan provides convincing rationales for decisions and effectively incorporates how

the outlined actions will establish a student-centered environment that promotes

social justice within the school.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Plan provides considerable rationales for decisions and solidly incorporates how

the outlined actions will establish a student-centered environment that promotes

social justice within the school.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Plan provides simplistic rationales for decisions and minimally incorporates how the

outlined actions will establish a student-centered environment that promotes social

justice within the school.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Plan provides unconvincing rationales for decisions and ineffectively incorporates

how the outlined actions will establish a student-centered environment that

promotes social justice within the school.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose (ASL) 21 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 21 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout, and skillfully

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 18.27 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout, and clearly

directed to a specific audience.

3. Approaching 15.54 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

2. Insufficient 14.49 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally

weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

1. No Submission 0 points

Development, Structure, and Conclusion (ASL) 24 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves

from development.

5. Target 24 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout.

The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous

conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable 20.88 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression

of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the

development of the purpose.

3. Approaching 17.76 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on

each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient 16.56 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are

inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic

and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

Evidence (ASL) 15 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers

other perspectives.

5. Target 15 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives

are integrated effectively.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or

integration of other perspectives is present.

1. No Submission 0 points

Mechanics of Writing (ASL) 15 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 15 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

Format/Documentation (ASL) 15 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 15 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of

direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. No Submission 0 points Total 300 points