Transcript EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review

EQuIP Rubric & Quality Review
Mathematics Training Module:
Grades 6-8
1
Session Goals
Use the EQuIP quality review process to determine the quality and
alignment of lessons and units to the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) in mathematics.
During this session, reviewers will:
1. Develop a common understanding of the EQuIP quality review
process
2. Develop a common understanding of the EQuIP Rubric including
its criteria and rating scale
3. Practice using the EQuIP quality review process and rubric to
evaluate and provide feedback on CCSS-aligned instructional
materials
2
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Principles & Agreements
1. Common Core: Before beginning a review, all members of the panel are familiar
with the Common Core Standards (CCSS) for their grade band and discipline(s).
2. Inquiry: Review processes emphasize inquiry rather than advocacy and are
organized in steps around a set of guiding questions.
3. Respect & Commitment: Each member of the panel is respected as a valued
colleague and contributor who makes a commitment to the EQuIP process.
4. Criteria & Evidence: All observations, judgments, discussions, and recommendations
are criterion- and evidence-based.
5. Constructive: Lessons/units to be reviewed are seen as “works in progress.” Panel
members are respectful of contributors’ work and make constructive observations
and suggestions based on evidence from the work.
6. Individual to Collective: Each member of the panel independently records his/her
observations prior to discussion. Discussions focus on understanding all panel
members’ interpretations of the criteria and the evidence they have found.
7. Understanding & Agreement: The goal of the process is to compare and calibrate
our judgments so that we reach agreement about alignment and quality with
respect to the CCSS.
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Rubric Dimensions
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The EQuIP quality review process is a collegial process that centers on
the use of criteria-based rubrics for English language arts (ELA)/literacy
and mathematics. The criteria are organized into four dimensions:
Alignment to the
depth of the CCSS
Key shifts in the
CCSS
Instructional
supports
Assessment
As educators examine instructional materials against the criteria
in each dimension, they are able to use common standards for
quality and generate evidence-based commentary and ratings on
the quality and alignment of materials.
4
Two Version of the Quality Review Rubric
The Electronic Version
For each dimension:
•
Select the checkbox for each
criterion for which clear and
substantial evidence is found.
• Make observations and
suggestions related to
criteria and evidence.
• Determine a rating for each
dimension based on
checked criteria and
observations.
For Dimension I:
• Use alignment rating to
determine whether to
proceed with review.
5
Two Versions of the Quality Review Rubric
The One-Page Version
6
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The Five Steps
Step 1. Review Materials
Step 2. Apply Criteria in Dimension I
Step 3. Apply Criteria in Dimensions II – IV
Step 4. Apply Overall Rating and Provide Summary
Comments
Step 5. Compare Overall Ratings and Determine
Next Steps
7
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The Five Steps
Step 1. Review Materials
• Record the grade and title of the lesson/unit on the Quality Review Rubric PDF
• Scan to see what the lesson/unit contains and how it is organized
• Read key materials related to instruction, assessment and teacher guidance
• Study and work the tasks that serve as the centerpiece for the lesson/unit,
analyzing the content and mathematical practices the tasks require
Step 2. Apply Criteria in Dimension I: Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS
• Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets
• Closely examine the materials through the “lens” of each criterion
• Indicate each criterion for which clear and substantial evidence is found
• Record input on specific improvements needed to meet criteria or strengthen
alignment
• Enter a rating of 0–3 for Dimension I
Note: Dimension I is non-negotiable. For the review to continue, a rating of 2 or 3 is
required. If the review is discontinued, consider giving general feedback
that might help developers/teachers make decisions regarding next steps.
8
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The Five Steps
Step 3. Apply Criteria in Dimensions II–IV
• Examine the lesson/unit through the “lens” of each criterion
• Indicate each criterion met, record observations and feedback, and then rate 0–3
Step 4. Apply an Overall Rating and Provide Summary Comments
• Individually review ratings for Dimensions I–IV, adding/clarifying comments as
needed
• Total dimension ratings and record an overall rating (E, E/I, R, N) based on total
score
• Individually write summary comments for the overall rating on the Quality
Review Rubric PDF
Step 5. Compare Overall Ratings and Determine Next Steps
• Note the evidence cited to arrive at final ratings, summary comments, and
similarities and differences among raters. Recommend next steps for the
lesson/unit and provide recommendations for improvement to
developers/teachers.
9
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The Flowchart
Discussion and
collaboration must
occur after
Dimension I and
then again either for
all dimensions after
Dimension IV or …
… separately after each
dimension and …
… always during the overall
rating process and summary
comments.
10
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 1: Review Example Materials
How Many Small Boxes?
Grade 6 – CPalms Resource ID#48955
This is a short online lesson (1-2 class periods) that includes:
— Lesson Plan Template including:
• Formative Assessment
• Instructions for presenting parts of the lesson
• Feedback to students
• Summative Assessment
• Guiding questions
• Prior knowledge
— Accommodations and recommendations
— Additional Information/Instructions
— Several attachments:
• How many small boxes answer key
• How many small boxes worksheet
Review
materials on your own to make sure you know what they
• We pack and ship Parts A, B, and C
contain
theyanswers
are organized. Work key tasks and study
• Weand
packhow
and ship
11
activities
withand
theship
grade-level
student strategies in mind.
• We pack
Part B
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 2: Apply the Criteria of Dimension I
The lesson/unit aligns with the letter and spirit of the CCSS:
 Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full depth of
the standards 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.
Determine rationales for checks or no-checks individually for this
dimension and then discuss and collaborate with your review
team.
12
Step 2: Apply Criteria of Dimension I
Example Materials – Checked Criteria
The lesson/unit aligns with the letter and spirit of the CCSS:
 Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full depth of
the standards 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.
13
Step 2: Apply Criteria of Dimension I, Criterion 1
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
Criterion:
 1. Targets a set of grade-level CCSS mathematics standard(s) to the full
depth of the standards for teaching and learning.
Observations and suggestions:
This lesson targets a single geometry standard: 6.G.A.2, one that is
explored in depth through the activities described. In addition to the
geometry standard, 6.NS.1 might also be cited, since students are required
to solve real world problems involving multiplication and division of
fractions.
14
Step 2: Apply Criteria of Dimension I, Criterion 2
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 2. 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.
Observations and suggestions:
Three Standards for Mathematical Practice are listed and connections to the
lesson are described at the end. It would be beneficial to tag these in the
actual body of the lesson to provide clearer connections to the actual
content. MP.8 relates to the extension for advanced students but it is not
clear that MP.8 is relevant to the activities for all students. This distinction
should be noted in the lesson. In addition MP.1 and MP.6 might also be
included since the activities include challenging problem solving and there is
a need for precision in the problem planning (diagrams, “no empty space”)
and the computation with fractions.
15
Step 2: Apply Criteria of Dimension I, Criterion 3
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 3. Presents a balance of mathematical procedures and deeper conceptual
understanding inherent in the CCSS.
Observations and suggestions:
There is a balance of mathematical procedures, beginning with using
manipulatives to find the actual volume of a three-dimensional figure with
whole number side lengths. This is then extended to a figure that has
fractional side lengths. There are also opportunities for students to use the
algorithms to determine the volume, removing the more concrete scaffolds
that were previously in place. Note: There is no mention of the form of the
equation V=bh until the end of the lesson and no clear explanation about
what it represents.
16
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Using Dimension Ratings and Rating Scales
Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension
2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension
1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension
0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension
17
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Using Dimension Ratings and Rating Scales
Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension
2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension
1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension
0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension
Descriptors for Dimensions I–IV:
3: Exemplifies CCSS Quality — meets the standard described by criteria in the dimension,
as explained in criterion-based observations
2: Approaching CCSS Quality — meets many criteria but will benefit from revision in
others, as suggested in criterion-based observations
1: Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in
criterion-based observations
0: Not representing CCSS Quality — does not address the criteria in the dimension
18
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Using Dimension Ratings and Rating Scales
Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension
2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension
1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension
0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension
Descriptors for Dimensions I–IV:
3: Exemplifies CCSS Quality — meets the standard described by criteria in the dimension,
as explained in criterion-based observations
2: Approaching CCSS Quality — meets many criteria but will benefit from revision in
others, as suggested in criterion-based observations
1: Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant revision, as suggested in
criterion-based observations
0: Not representing CCSS Quality — does not address the criteria in the dimension
19
Step 2: Apply the Criteria of Dimension I
Example Materials – Discuss and Collaborate
Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Feedback, and Rating
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we
have checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and
evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
• Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the
rubric?
Determine and discuss your individual dimension ratings with
your review team.
20
Step 2: Apply the Criteria of Dimension I
Example Materials – Rating
Rating: 3 Exemplifies CCSS Quality – Meets the standard described
by the criteria in the dimension, as explained in criterion-based
observations.
Rationale: All three criteria are addressed and met in the lesson.
Including 6.NS.1 in the targeted standards and making clear and
specific connections between the Standards for Mathematical Practice
and the activities of the lessons would improve the lesson further.
21
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Constructive Feedback
Effective feedback is vital to the EQuIP Quality Review
Process.
• Criterion-Based: Written comments are based on the criteria
used for review in each dimension. No extraneous comments are
included.
• Evidence Cited: Written comments indicate that the reviewer
looked for evidence of each criterion of a given dimension.
Examples cite where and how the criteria are met or not met.
• Improvement Suggested: Improvements are specifically
identified to meet criteria or strengthen the lesson or unit.
• Clear Communication: Written comment are constructed in a
manner keeping with basic grammar, spelling, sentence structure
Use these points to determine and discuss the observations and
and conventions.
suggestions appropriate for this dimension with your review team.
Step 2: Apply the Criteria of Dimension I
Example Materials – Providing Feedback
Observations/Feedback and Rating
This lesson targets a single geometry standard: 6.G.A.2, one that is explored in depth through
the activities described. In addition to the geometry standard, 6.NS.1 might also be cited, since
students are required to solve real world problems involving multiplication and division of
fractions.
Three Standards for Mathematical Practice are listed and connections to the lesson are
described at the end. It would be beneficial to tag these in the actual body of the lesson to
provide clearer connections to the actual content. MP.8 relates to the extension for advanced
students but it is not clear that MP.8 is relevant to the activities for all students. This distinction
should be noted in the lesson. In addition MP.1 and MP.6 might also be included since the
activities include challenging problem solving and there is a need for precision in the problem
planning (diagrams, “no empty space”) and the computation with fractions.
There is a balance of mathematical procedures, beginning with using manipulatives to find the
actual volume of a three-dimensional figure with whole number side lengths. This is then
extended to a figure that has fractional side lengths. There are also opportunities for students
to use the algorithms to determine the volume, removing the more concrete scaffolds that
were previously in place. Note: There is no mention of the form of the equation V=bh until the
end of the lesson and no clear explanation about what it represents.
23
Step 2: Apply the Criteria of Dimension I
Example Materials – Providing Feedback
Observations/Feedback and Rating
This lesson targets a single geometry standard: 6.G.A.2, one that is explored in depth through
the activities described. In addition to the geometry standard, 6.NS.1 might also be cited, since
students are required to solve real world problems involving multiplication and division of
fractions.
Three Standards for Mathematical Practice are listed and connections to the lesson are
described at the end. It would be beneficial to tag these in the actual body of the lesson to
provide clearer connections to the actual content. MP.8 relates to the extension for advanced
students but it is not clear that MP.8 is relevant to the activities for all students. This distinction
should be noted in the lesson. In addition MP.1 and MP.6 might also be included since the
activities include challenging problem solving and there is a need for precision in the problem
planning (diagrams, “no empty space”) and the computation with fractions.
There is a balance of mathematical procedures, beginning with using manipulatives to find the
actual volume of a three-dimensional figure with whole number side lengths. This is then
extended to a figure that has fractional side lengths. There are also opportunities for students
to use the algorithms to determine the volume, removing the more concrete scaffolds that
were previously in place. Note: There is no mention of the form of the equation V=bh until the
end of the lesson and no clear explanation about what it represents.
24
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 2: Dimension I Reflection
Consider the rating for Dimension I:
• Is the overall rating for alignment a 3 or 2?
• Does the quality of the alignment to the CCSS warrant
continuing with the review?
If yes, continue with Step 3 for Dimensions II – IV.
If we agree that the materials warrant a 2- or 3-rating for
Dimension I, we continue the review, applying the criteria of
Dimensions II – IV.
25
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension II
The lesson/unit addresses key shifts in the CCSS:
 Focus: Lessons and units targeting the major work of the grade provide an
especially in-depth treatment, with especially high expectations. Lessons and
units targeting supporting clusters have visible connection to the major work of
the grade and are sufficiently brief. Lessons and units do not hold students
responsible for material from later grades.
 Coherence: The content develops through reasoning about the new concepts on
the basis of previous understandings and provides opportunities for students to
transfer knowledge and skills within and across domains and learning
progressions.
26
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension II
 Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging
mathematics with appropriate balance among the following:
• Application: Provides opportunities for students to independently apply
mathematical concepts in real-world situations and problem solve with
persistence, choosing and applying an appropriate model or strategy to new
situations.
• Conceptual Understanding: Develops students’ conceptual understanding
through tasks, brief problems, questions, multiple representations and
opportunities for students to write and speak about their understanding.
• Procedural Skill and Fluency: Expects, supports and provides guidelines for
procedural skill and fluency with core calculations and mathematical
procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be performed
quickly and accurately.
Determine rationales for checks or no-checks individually for this
dimension and then discuss and collaborate with your review
team.
27
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Checked Criteria
The lesson/unit addresses reflects evidence of key shifts that are reflected in the
CCSS:
 Focus: Lessons and units targeting the major work of the grade provide an especially in-depth treatment, with
especially high expectations. Lessons and units targeting supporting clusters have visible connection to the major
work of the grade and are sufficiently brief. Lessons and units do not hold students responsible for material from
later grades.
 Coherence: The content develops through reasoning about the new concepts on the basis of previous
understandings and provides opportunities for students to transfer knowledge and skills within and across domains
and learning progressions.
 Rigor: Requires students to engage with and demonstrate challenging mathematics with appropriate balance
among the following:
o
Application: Provides opportunities for students to independently apply mathematical concepts in real-
o
world situations and problem solve with persistence, choosing and applying an appropriate model or
strategy to new situations.
Conceptual Understanding: Develops students’ conceptual understanding through tasks, brief problems,
questions, multiple representations and opportunities for students to write and speak about their
understanding.
o
Procedural Skill and Fluency: Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency
with core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade) to be
performed quickly and accurately.
28
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
The lesson/unit addresses reflects evidence of key shifts that are reflected in the
CCSS:
 Focus:
The lesson addresses finding the volume of right rectangular prisms, a critical concept for
grade 6. To expand the focus, a suggestion is to include 6.NS.1 as an additional target and
make the connection to the requirements of that standard number sense explicit
throughout the lesson.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Criterion-based?
Evidence Cited?
Improvement Suggested?
Clear Communication?
29
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 Coherence:
The content of this lesson does make a connection to prior knowledge, beginning with a
hands-on introductory activity that has students finding volume of a figure with whole
number side lengths. Including some reference to a connection to knowledge and skills
within the grade level would help students make connections across domains and clusters.
This might easily be accomplished by including 6.NS.1 as an additional target for the lesson.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Criterion-based?
Evidence Cited?
Improvement Suggested?
Clear Communication?
30
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 Rigor:
o Application:
o Conceptual Understanding:
o Procedural Skill and Fluency:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Criterion-based?
Evidence Cited?
Improvement Suggested?
Clear Communication?
The lesson does include opportunities for the students to progress in the area of procedural
skill and fluency as evidenced by the use of different ways to find the volume. The suggestion
for an extension, which asks the students to determine the relationship between the increase
in the dimensions and the change in volume, adds higher-level thinking to the lesson and
might be considered for all students. The tasks and questions in the summative assessment,
however, are quite prescriptive. For example, in 'Part B' of the summative assessment,
students are asked to find the volume of the shipping box in three different ways with the
formulas explicitly mentioned. A suggestion here would be to make the task more open-ended
and require the students to choose and apply strategies to new situations. Overall, the
activities lead students to conceptual understanding by providing them with concrete models
of the problem provided. The procedural skill extends from the use of manipulatives for
determining volume to the actual algorithm (V=bh, V=lwh). Students are required to apply the
algorithm to additional problems.
31
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Discuss and Collaborate
Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and Rating
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have
checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and
evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
• Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the
rubric?
Determine and discuss your individual dimension ratings with your
review team…
32
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension II
Example Materials – Rating
Rating: 3 Exemplifies CCSS Quality – Meets the standard
described by the criteria in the dimension, as explained in
criterion-based observations.
Rationale: Attention to Focus, Coherence, and Rigor, the key
shifts in the CCSS, is evident in the materials.
33
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension III
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the
targeted standards, including, when appropriate, the use of technology and
media.
 Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language,
terminology, and concrete or abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols,
expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline.
 Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking
questions, problems and tasks that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical
thinking.
 Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.
34
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension III
 Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention
and support for a broad range of learners. *
 Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles.
 Provides extra supports for students working below grade level.
 Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade
level.
* Note: All three of these components are required in a high quality lesson or unit.
35
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension III
A unit or longer lesson should: longer lessons:
 Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of
learners such as using multiple representations (including models), using a range
of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, pair-share, etc.
 Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their
mathematical understanding independently.
 Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the
concepts or skills advance and deepen over time.
 Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with
core calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the
standards for the grade) to be performed quickly and accurately.
36
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension III
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the targeted standards, including,
when appropriate, the use of technology and media.
 Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language, terminology, and concrete or
abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols, expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline.
 Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking questions, problems and tasks
that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical thinking.
 Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.
 Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and support for a broad
range of learners.

Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles.

Provides extra supports for students working below grade level.

Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade level.
A longer unit or lesson should:
 Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of learners such as using
multiple representations (including models), using a range of questions, checking for understanding,
flexible grouping, pair-share, etc.
 Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding
independently.
 Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts or skills advance and
deepen over time.
 Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core
calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade)
37
to be performed quickly and accurately.
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Sharing Feedback
INDIVIDUALLY:
• Closely examine the materials through the “lens” of each criterion
• Check each criterion for which clear and substantial evidence is found
• Record evidence for each check or where you looked and were unable to
find evidence
• Write feedback using the four qualities for ONE of the criterion that you
checked/did not checked
COLLECTIVELY:
• Compare and discuss checks and evidence
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have
checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or
Determine
rationales in
forthe
checks
or no-checks
individually and then discuss and
lack of evidence)
instructional
materials?
with your review team. For this dimension we will pause to share
•collaborate
Choose ONE
piece of feedback for the group to share with entire room
some of our findings with the larger group…
38
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Checked Criteria
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the targeted standards, including,
when appropriate, the use of technology and media.
 Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language, terminology, and concrete or
abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols, expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline.
 Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking questions, problems and tasks
that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical thinking.
 Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.
 Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and support for a broad
range of learners.

Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles.

Provides extra supports for students working below grade level.

Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade level.
A longer unit or lesson should:
 Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of learners such as using
multiple representations (including models), using a range of questions, checking for understanding,
flexible grouping, pair-share, etc.
 Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their mathematical understanding
independently.
 Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts or skills advance and
deepen over time.
 Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core
calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the grade)
39
to be performed quickly and accurately.
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Includes clear and sufficient guidance to support teaching and learning of the
targeted standards, including, when appropriate, the use of technology and
media.
There is overall clarity in the lesson and how it be taught but it is not clear how it will be
“learned.” The guidance for questioning and discussion is not there. A master teacher would
probably be able to use the given instructions effectively but it is not likely that a novice
teacher would know how to apply some of the vague instructions. For example the header for
the assessment descriptions states simply, “The teacher will gather information during and
after each activity.” And in the assessment descriptions for each of the parts of the lesson it is
stated that the teacher will assess student understanding “through observation and
questioning.” And while there are guiding questions and suggested responses provided, there
is no guidance for how to interpret an incorrect or partially correct response to the questions.
40
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Uses and encourages precise and accurate mathematics, academic language,
terminology, and concrete or abstract representations (e.g., pictures, symbols,
expressions, equations, graphics, models) in the discipline.
This criterion is partially met. The use of concrete and abstract representations in this lesson
is commendable. Students are given the opportunity to work with a variety of hands-on
material with questioning to scaffold their understanding. However precision and accuracy
could be improved in the lesson. The term Tobbler boxes is ambiguous (unknown) and a visual
reference or definition is needed. Also in the description for the Part C activity it seems that
there is an error in the statement, “…decomposing… as side length of 3 ½ to 10 halves…”
Shortly after that, in the Part A bullets under Feedback to Students, it is stated that the
“length, width, and height of a prism is determined by adding the number of unit cubes…”
This is not precisely stated and should be rephrased as, “… determined by counting the
number of unit cubes …”
41
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
 Engages students in productive struggle through relevant, thought-provoking
questions, problems and tasks that stimulate interest and elicit mathematical
thinking.
Although questions were included in the lesson, there are not enough opportunities
for students to apply their knowledge of this standard.
 Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.
The instructional expectations are described and are easy to understand. The lesson
is clear in its instructional expectations and is easy to follow and use. Supplementary
materials are readily accessible and clearly labeled.
42
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 Provides appropriate level and type of scaffolding, differentiation, intervention
and support for a broad range of learners.
 Supports diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, interests and styles.
 Provides extra supports for students working below grade level.
 Provides extensions for students with high interest or working above grade
level.
This lesson partially meets this criterion. Accommodations and strategies for
scaffolding and differentiation are mentioned at the end of the lesson but are not
very clear. More specific examples would help with providing appropriate support
for diverse learners. This could be where technology (websites) could be used for
extra practice and examples for students. This would also apply to students working
above level. The supports are mentioned but are not specific. A suggestion might be
to use an online activity and additional visuals for visual learners and ELL students.
Connecting this lesson to net-building 3D shapes may also engage visual learners.
43
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
A unit or longer lesson should:
 Recommends and facilitates a mix of instructional approaches for a variety of
learners such as using multiple representations (including models), using a
range of questions, checking for understanding, flexible grouping, pair-share,
etc.
 Gradually removes supports, requiring students to demonstrate their
mathematical understanding independently.
 Demonstrates an effective sequence and a progression of learning where the concepts
or skills advance and deepen over time.
 Expects, supports and provides guidelines for procedural skill and fluency with core
calculations and mathematical procedures (when called for in the standards for the
grade) to be performed quickly and accurately.
This short lesson is not held to these criteria, even though some may be applicable.
44
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Discuss and Collaborate
Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and
Rating
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we
have checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and
evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
• Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the
rubric?
Determine and discuss your individual dimension ratings with
your review team…
45
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension III
Example Materials – Rating
Rating: 2
Approaching CCSS Quality: Meets many criteria but will
benefit from revision in others, as suggested in criterion-based
observations.
Rationale: The materials need guidance for how questioning and
discussion can be used as effective teaching tools; a few corrections
in terminology and language; and more explicit suggestions for
scaffolding, differentiation, intervention and/or support for diverse
learners.
46
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 3: Apply the Criteria of Dimension IV
The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based
content and skills:
 Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student
can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS.
 Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased,
including the use of grade-level language in student prompts.
 Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide
sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance.
In addition, for units and longer lessons: and longer lessons:
 Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include pre-,
formative, summative and self-assessment measures.
Determine rationales for checks or no-checks individually for this
dimension and then discuss and collaborate with your review
team.
47
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension IV
Example Materials – Checked Criteria
The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based
content and skills:
 Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student
can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS.
 Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased,
including the use of grade-level language in student prompts.
 Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide
sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance.
In addition, for units and longer lessons:
 Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include pre-,
formative, summative and self-assessment measures.
48
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension IV
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based
content and skills:
 Is designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a
student can independently demonstrate the targeted CCSS.
The assessments in this lesson do not require students to independently demonstrate the
targeted CCSS. In all parts students work with a partner denying the opportunity for the
teacher to gauge independent understanding. It is not clear in the lesson what the observable
evidence of student learning would be.
 Assesses student proficiency using methods that are accessible and unbiased,
including the use of grade-level language in student prompts.
Grade-level language was used in all the prompts and the questions appear to be unbiased.
If more formal and independent assessments are developed for this lesson, it will be
important to attend to the need for fair and accessible questions and prompts.
49
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension IV
Example Materials – Rationale for Checks
 Includes aligned rubrics, answer keys and scoring guidelines that provide
sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance.
Possible student responses to the guiding questions are provided but there is no guidance for
the teacher as to how an incorrect or partially correct response should be interpreted. The
suggested responses to the guiding questions provide only a bare minimum of support for
assessment in the lesson.
In addition, for units and longer lessons:
 Uses varied modes of curriculum-embedded assessments that may include
pre-, formative, summative and self-assessment measures.
Since this lesson is considered short it is not responsible for this criterion.
50
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension IV
Example Materials– Discuss and Collaborate
Compare Criterion-Based Checks, Observations/Feedback and Rating
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have
checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and
evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
• Do our ratings correspond to the rating and descriptors in the
rubric?
Determine and discuss your individual dimension ratings with your
review team.
51
Step 3: Apply Criteria of Dimension IV
Example Materials– Rating
Rating: 1
Developing toward CCSS Quality — needs significant
revision, as suggested in criterion-based observations
Rationale: It is not clear in the materials when students are working
independently, making it unclear whether assessment if individual
learning is possible or what the observable evidence of student
learning would be. Clear guidance for the teacher as to how to
interpret student responses to guiding questions is needed.
52
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 4: Overall Rating Descriptors
Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit:
E: Exemplar — Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in
Dimensions II–IV (total 11–12)
E/I: Exemplar if Improved — Aligned and needs some improvement
in one or more dimensions (total 8–10)
R: Revision Needed — Aligned partially and needs significant
revision in one or more dimensions (total 3–7)
N: Not Ready to Review — Not aligned and does not meet criteria
(total 0–2)
53
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 4: Overall Rating Descriptors
Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit:
E: Exemplar — Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in
Dimensions II–IV (total 11–12)
E/I: Exemplar if Improved — Aligned and needs some improvement
in one or more dimensions (total 8–10)
R: Revision Needed — Aligned partially and needs significant
revision in one or more dimensions (total 3–7)
N: Not Ready to Review — Not aligned and does not meet criteria
(total 0–2)
54
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 4: Overall Rating Descriptors
Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit:
E: Exemplar — Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in
Dimensions II–IV (total 11–12)
E/I: Exemplar if Improved — Aligned and needs some improvement
in one or more dimensions (total 8–10)
R: Revision Needed — Aligned partially and needs significant
revision in one or more dimensions (total 3–7)
N: Not Ready to Review — Not aligned and does not meet criteria
(total 0–2)
55
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 4: Apply Overall Rating and Provide Summary
• Go back through dimensions and add the individual
dimensional ratings to initially determine the overall rating
category.
• Consider how your rating, based on the total points, matches
your overall sense of the quality of the materials.
• Consider if your specific feedback statements are matched
with the appropriate dimensions.
• Consider how your dimensional feedback supports your
judgments.
• Consider if the lesson falls in the appropriate overall rating
category.and discuss your individual OVERALL ratings with your
Determine
review team.
56
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 4: Developing Summary Comments
Summary Comments:
• Highlight the strongest aspects of the unit.
• Succinctly summarize key areas for improvement
articulated in the dimensional comments.
Determine individually appropriate overall rating and summary
comments and discuss with your review team.
57
Step 4: Overall Rating and Summary Comments
Example Materials – Overall Rating and Summary
Normed Response
6
DIMENSIONAL RATINGS: 3321
How Many Small Boxes?
E/I – [Overall rating]
Overall, this lesson is very good. Its strength is in its inclusion of realworld application and a balance of conceptual understanding and
procedural skill. Suggestions for improvement include adding 6.NS.1
as an additional target and providing more specific information for
accommodating students needing additional support. The biggest
need is in the area of assessment, where guidance is needed for
teachers to understand how to interpret student responses and for
when and how to gauge independent student understanding.
58
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Step 5: Discuss Summary and Next Steps
Compare overall ratings and synthesize feedback:
• How do our overall ratings compare?
• Does this example serve as a model of CCSS instruction? What
are its strengths? Areas for improvement?
• What communication and support will the developer receive?
• What are the next steps for this material?
59
EQuIP Quality Review Process
Reflection
• What additional practice is needed on the EQuIP
Review Process and Rubric?
• What other ways can the EQuIP processes and
materials influence and be incorporated into our
practice?
• How will we plan for applying the EQuIP Quality
Review Process? Who will be involved?
60
EQuIP Quality Review Process
The Review Team
When forming and/or working with a review team:
• Make sure all team members have training in the process and know the
CCSS (at least for their grade level).
• Have a review plan that considers the experience and expertise of all
team members.
• Team members may choose to compare individual ratings after each
dimension or wait until each person has individually rated and recorded
all input for Dimensions II–IV before beginning discussion.
• Individuals should record their overall rating prior to discussion.
• Adjustments to ratings and/or commentary should take place as a part
of the group discussion.
61
Achieve
www.achieve.org
1400 16th Street, NW / Suite 510
Washington, DC 20036
62