|
NETS*T Certification: Guidelines for Evaluators |
|||
|
The following guidelines were identified during the Evaluator workshop held at JMU on July 21, 2004. |
|||
| Guidelines for Evaluators | |||
|
■ |
To earn Meets for a rubric, each performance indicator (individual section within the rubric) must earn Meets; if even one performance indicator of a rubric is Approaching, then entire rubric earns Approaching. | ||
| ■ | Read rubric carefully and note all the elements embedded within a performance indicator (such as regularly, over time, uses to modify instruction, etc.); artifacts that address these details must be submitted in order to earn Meets. | ||
| ■ | In order to use your own observation of the submitter in your evaluation, documentation of that observation must be submitted as part of the evidence for the rubric. (For example, you can email the submitter with notes from your observation which they can then submit as evidence.) | ||
| ■ | Each submission should include two parts: a complete reflection and one or more work-product artifacts that serve as evidence. | ||
| ■ | Artifacts must be current (within past 2 years), although additional artifacts from past may be included as supplements. | ||
| ■ | Expectations for submitted reflections: | ||
| □ | Explicit explanation of how/why artifacts meet the rubric. Submitter may want to use the same phrases as are used in the rubric. | ||
| □ | Each performance indicator should be addressed in the reflection. | ||
| □ | Explanation of how the artifacts are used to influence classroom instruction. | ||
| □ | If work-product is mentioned in the reflection, that item should be submitted as an artifact in order to provide evidence for claims. | ||
| □ | Submitters may find it helpful to create reflection as a Word document and upload it rather than typing reflection in the box provided. This prevents loss of data in the event of a system time-out and allows reflection to be easily edited if a resubmission is required. | ||
| ■ |
Evaluate against the rubric, not against your own ideas of how you might have done the lesson/unit differently. |
||
| ■ |
Any submission that contains student names (reflections and artifacts) cannot be considered for evaluation and must be removed from the system immediately. |
||