Benchmark - Clinical Field Experience D: Leading Leaders in Giving Peer Feedback Related to Teacher Performance

Benchmark - Clinical Field Experience D: Leading Leaders in Giving Peer

Feedback Related to Teacher Performance - Rubric

Develop and Supervise Instructional and Leadership Capacity (B) 75 points

Criteria Description

Develop and Supervise Instructional and Leadership Capacity (C2.3)

5. Target 75 points

Comprehensively summarizes coaching experiences, demonstrating how the staff’s

instructional and leadership capacity was developed and supervised.

4. Acceptable 65.25 points

Soundly summarizes coaching experiences, demonstrating how the staff’s

instructional and leadership capacity was developed and supervised.

3. Approaching 55.5 points

Vaguely summarizes coaching experiences, demonstrating how the staff’s

instructional and leadership capacity was developed and supervised.

2. Insufficient 51.75 points

Poorly summarizes coaching experiences, demonstrating how the staff’s

instructional and leadership capacity was developed and supervised.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Develop Leaders for High-Quality Instruction and Student Learning (B) 75 points

Criteria Description

Develop Leaders for High-Quality Instruction and Student Learning (C3.5)

5. Target 75 points

Analysis skillfully describes how developing leaders within the school helps focus

organizational time on high-quality school instruction and student learning.

4. Acceptable 65.25 points

Collapse All

Analysis logically describes how developing leaders within the school helps focus

organizational time on high-quality school instruction and student learning.

3. Approaching 55.5 points

Analysis shallowly describes how developing leaders within the school helps focus

organizational time on high-quality school instruction and student learning.

2. Insufficient 51.75 points

Analysis weakly describes how developing leaders within the school helps focus

organizational time on high-quality school instruction and student learning.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed

Distributed Leadership Structure and Recommendations (B) 90 points

Criteria Description

Distributed Leadership Structure and Recommendations (C3.4)

5. Target 90 points

Analysis thoroughly explains the school’s distributed leadership structure and

provides 1-3 compelling recommendations to improve the structure or related

policies.

4. Acceptable 78.3 points

Analysis clearly explains the school’s distributed leadership structure and provides

1-3 appropriate recommendations to improve the structure or related policies.

3. Approaching 66.6 points

Analysis minimally explains the school’s distributed leadership structure and

provides 1-3 unfocused recommendations to improve the structure or related

policies.

2. Insufficient 62.1 points

Analysis inadequately explains the school’s distributed leadership structure and

provides 1-3 insufficient or irrelevant recommendations to improve the structure or

related policies.

1. No Submission 0 points

Organization 15 points

Criteria Description

Organization

5. Target 15 points

The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas

that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides

the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the

required word count.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The

content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is

within a reasonable range of the required word count.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with

a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the

required word count.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The

ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the

summary is widely outside of the required word count.

Documentation of Sources 15 points

Criteria Description

citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and

style

5. Target 15 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment

and style. Format is free of error.

4. Acceptable 13.05 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is

mostly correct.

3. Approaching 11.1 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some

key formatting and citation errors are present.

2. Insufficient 10.35 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to

assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. No Submission 0 points

Mechanics of Writing 30 points

Criteria Description

includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use

5. Target 30 points

Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-

developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are

varied and engaging.

4. Acceptable 26.1 points

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder

comprehension. Variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some

practice and content-related language.

3. Approaching 22.2 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent

language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.

2. Insufficient 20.7 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.

1. No Submission 0 points

Total 300 points