A teacher evaluation rubric is designed to provide teachers with an annual assessment of where they stand in various performance areas and a detailed blueprint on how to improve.
Teacher evaluation rubrics are designed to serve as a guide for teacher growth and professional development, not simply a checklist to be completed during classroom visits.
Teacher evaluation rubrics in different states exemplify and align with the teaching standards approved by the appropriate state boards of education. They are designed to be used as an assessment tool to aid evaluators in conducting teacher observations and as a self-assessment tool that teachers can use to track their performance and identify areas in their teaching practice that need improvement.
The best way for evaluators to accurately measure a teacher's performance is through unannounced mini-observations every 2-3 weeks or so throughout the year. One classroom observation would not be adequate to correctly fill out the teacher evaluation rubric. The mini-observations can then be followed with one-to-one conversations to give feedback and suggestions to the teacher and allow them to voice any concerns they may have.
The goal of teacher evaluation rubrics is to help teachers and evaluators:
1. Develop a shared and consistent understanding of what exemplary teaching performance looks like in the classroom;
2. Develop a consistent and universally accepted structure and terminology for organizing evidence when rating specific elements under key performance indicators;
3. Make an informed and professional judgment on each standard's summative and formative performance scores.
Teacher evaluation rubrics generally adopt the following basic layout, even though each aspect may be worded differently depending on the state.
These refer to the broad groupings of the skills, knowledge, and performance required for effective teaching practice, as detailed in the state’s regulatory framework. Standards may include, but are not limited to:
An indicator describes the specific skills, knowledge, and performance required for each standard or domain. For instance, a curriculum and instructional planning standard can have the following three indicators in the teacher evaluation rubric:
Likewise, a teaching/delivery of instruction standard can have the following rubric indicators:
An element is a more specific description of the behaviors and actions associated with each indicator. It breaks down each indicator into detailed teaching practices, allowing evaluators to give highly specific feedback that works as a blueprint for areas that require improvement.
For instance, the curriculum and planning indicator under the curriculum and instructional planning standard can have the following elements:
The learning environment indicator under the teaching/delivery of instruction standard can have the following elements:
A performance descriptor is an observable and measurable statement of the teacher’s behaviors and actions as they relate to each element and serves as the basis for assessing their performance.
Rubrics typically use a four-level rating system to guide the way a teacher’s performance is evaluated. Each of the four levels may use different terminology, depending on the state, but the intention is clear - to rate teacher performance as 'highly effective', 'accomplished', 'needs improvement', or 'unsatisfactory'.
The highest rating level in teacher evaluation rubrics is reserved for teachers with outstanding teaching practices that meet very stringent evaluation criteria. Performing at this level involves adopting teaching methods that engage students and incentivize them to take responsibility for their learning.
For instance, the performance descriptor for a distinguished level of performance under the subject matter knowledge element might read as follows:
The third rating level in teacher evaluation rubrics describes solid, above-par performance. It describes teachers who exhibit a high level of competency and mastery of the profession and actively adopt innovative ways to improve student outcomes.
For instance, the performance descriptor for an accomplished level of performance under the subject matter knowledge element might read as follows:
This second rating level describes performance that is below par with real deficiencies. It represents teaching practices encompassing the basic skills and knowledge necessary to implement critical elements, albeit without success sometimes.
While it is not uncommon to find some novice teachers beginning at this level, any person who scores a level-2 rating in their teacher evaluation should not be content with remaining at this level.
For instance, the performance descriptor for an emerging level of performance under the subject matter knowledge element might read as follows:
This level represents the lowest score a teacher can receive on their performance evaluation. It describes teaching practices that don’t convey an adequate grasp of the concepts or result in the unsuccessful implementation of critical elements. It is an unacceptable level of performance and may result in the teacher’s dismissal if immediate, drastic action is not taken to improve their performance.
For instance, the performance descriptor for an unsatisfactory level of performance under the subject matter knowledge element might read as follows:
It is worth noting that teachers’ performance levels may vary from year to year due to various factors, the most common ones being changes in grade or content. The performance level on which an evaluator ranks a teacher must be based on their actual, current teaching practices without any future performance expectations. It is especially important if they (the evaluators) have to choose between two adjacent performance levels, such as deciding whether a teacher’s performance in a specific element is “emerging” or “unsatisfactory.”
The same principle applies when teachers complete the rubric during their own self-assessment. They must pick a performance level that best describes their current teaching practices rather than their anticipated future performance.
Teacher evaluation rubrics are a useful tool to document teaching practices. They are intended to support the standardized evaluation cycle for teachers at every level: pre-K to advanced placement, special education teachers, specialist teachers, etc.
Evaluators and teachers should use rubrics strategically to discuss and agree on specific indicators and elements that may be of higher priority based on the teacher’s roles, responsibilities, professional practices, and student needs.
If you’re looking for an efficient way to document every step of the staff evaluation process, including self-evaluations, walkthroughs, reporting, supporting evidence, and performance analytics, Evaluation from Education Advanced can help you do just that.
Request a demo today to see it in action.
If your school is interested in new ways to improve the learning experience for children, you may also be interested in automating tasks and streamlining processes so that your team has more time to work directly with students. Education Advanced offers a large suite of tools that may be able to help. For example, three of our most popular and effective tools are:
Document every step of the staff evaluation process, including walk-throughs, self-evaluations, supporting evidence, reporting and performance analytics. Get Started →
