Moderated Peer Review
Assessment
Handbook
and Development
Instructional Practice and Professional
Expectation Rubrics
2015
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
A global District
in a global city
TOOLS PROVIDED IN THIS HANDBOOK
The rubric is designed to be used with assessments in all content areas and courses
The Assessment Review Form is used to enter rubric scores and evidence to guide the
Moderated Peer-Review (MPR) protocol
The protocol describes the steps that a teacher may follow with peers or with an
appraiser to review an assessment
Sample rubric scores illustrate how the rubric can be used in all grade levels and content
areas. It provides examples of the type of evidence that should be used when assigning
scores to rubric criteria
Additional
Resources
ii | P a g e
Appendices: A curated list of supporting tools and free assessment development
resources available online
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Moderated Peer Review (MPR) Handbook is designed to provide guidance and support to teachers and appraisers
during the design, review, and approval process of summative assessments.
Who can use this handbook?
Individual teachers -- to review the quality, rigor, and format of their own summative assessments
Groups of teachers -- to review and provide feedback on each other’s assessments
Teachers and appraisers/school leaders -- when discussing the quality, rigor, and format of any assessment a teacher
wishes to use as their end-of-year summative evaluation for courses that require appraiser-approved assessments
for TADS
Other campus-based instructional staff, curriculum specialists, central office staff, etc. -- when creating or reviewing
the format, quality, and rigor of any assessment
Are teachers or appraisers required to use this handbook or the assessment samples provided?
No. This handbook is intended to be used as a tool that provides a common language for teachers and appraisers to use as
they develop and evaluate their own assessments, or other assessments they are considering using to measure student
mastery at the end of a course. While the MPR rubric criteria can be applied to assessments for all courses and grade levels,
the tools and resources in the handbook are for reference only.
Why and how was this handbook created?
Stemming from recommendations made by HISD teachers and school leaders on the Professional Educators Compensation
Support Committee (PECAS), this handbook is the result of months of collaboration between the HISD offices of Curriculum,
Research and Accountability, and School Support. It also reflects input solicited from other offices such as Student
Assessment, and from district teachers.
In seeking to expand opportunities for teachers to contribute to the expectations for quality assessment in HISD, the district
created and piloted a Moderated Peer Review protocol. Teachers representing 23 campuses, 10 content areas, and all school
levels, collectively devoted over 230 hours to piloting the rubric and protocol by reviewing sample assessments. Their work
and recommendations are reflected in this handbook.
Acknowledgements
The following teachers contributed to the improvement of the tools provided in this handbook through their participation
in the spring 2015 MPR pilot:
Jared Berry
Margaret Britton
Linda Buza
Rachel Carter
Paula Ceasar
Sangeeta Chadha
Catherine Clay
Tamira Cole
Rachel Davis
Nicole DiLuglio
Elsie Ekwo
Tamika Ervin
Heidi Florian
iii | P a g e
Pin Oak MS
Parker ES
Bush ES
Stevenson MS
Madison HS
Looscan ES
Waltrip HS
Madison HS
Carnegie HS
HSPVA
Hobby ES
Jackson MS
Bellaire HS
Monica Hawthorne
Bashiru Jola-Isiba
Sanja Korman
John Laymon
Daniel Lowry
James Montgomery
Mark Moore
Rachael Musquiz
Tenille Pakoejoe
Kyle Stumpf
Jessica Thibodeaux
Joelle Trayers
Shannon Wight
Reagan HS
Fonville MS
Bellaire HS
Lamar HS
Twain MS
Pershing MS
Bellaire HS
Furr HS
Milby HS
Lanier MS
Highland Heights ES
Roosevelt ES
Davis H
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Moderated Peer Review Assessment Rubric
Page 1
Moderated Peer Review Protocol
Page 5
Assessment Review Form
Page 7
Sample Rubric Scores for Various Types of Assessments
Page 8
o
Journal and Writing Assignment | Social Studies | 11th and 12th Grade
Page 9
o
Student Portfolio and Rubric | Web Technologies |11th and 12th Grade
Page 13
o
Performance-based Rubric - Dance 1 I High School
Page 19
o
Student Portfolio and Rubric | Pre-AP Art 1 | 9th – 12th Grade
Page 21
o
Selected (Multiple Choice) and Short Answer Response | English Language Arts | 10th Grade
Page 24
o
Written and Spoke Performance-based Rubric | French | High School
Page 29
Appendices
Page 32
o
Appendix 1 | Printable MPR Rubric
Page 33
o
Appendix 2 | Appraiser-Approved Assessment Review Form
Page 35
o
Appendix 3 | Bloom’s Taxonomy
Page 37
o
Appendix 4 | Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Wheel
Page 38
o
Appendix 5 | Determining Reading Levels
Page 39
o
Appendix 6 | Other Assessment Resources
Page 40
Moderated Peer Review Assessment Rubric
The MPR assessment rubric was developed with district and teacher input during the 2015 Moderated Peer Review pilot. Originally based
on the work of Paul Bambrick-Santoyo in Driven by Data: A Practical Guide to Improve Instruction [John Wiley, 2010], the rubric was adapted
to be used by Houston ISD teachers and appraisers as a tool to support assessment development and review, and not as a teacher appraisal
instrument.
UNDERSTANDING THE ELEMENTS OF THE RUBRIC
STRANDS:
The strands are the categories grouping
rubric criteria. There are 3 strands:
Alignment and Stretch
Rigor and Complexity
True Mastery
CRITERIA:
Each criterion is labeled based on the strand to which it belongs. For
example, A-1 is the first criterion for the ‘Alignment and Stretch’ strand.
1|Page
‘MEETS EXPECTATIONS’ COLUMN:
The shaded column represents the minimum level of
assessment quality that should be present in a
summative assessment.
INDICATORS:
Indicators describe the evidence that
must be present in the assessment to
receive the score at the top of each
column.
Words in bold are helpful when
identifying the difference between
one level and the next.
WHY DON’T I SEE A ‘FINAL SCORE’?
The goal of the rubric is to help
teachers identify specific areas where
the quality of their assessments can be
improved. For that reason, final scores
or averages are not included, and each
criterion is scored individually.
FOOTNOTES AND CLARIFICATION:
Footnotes, where applicable, provide clarification.
THE RUBRIC AS A TOOL FOR ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT
This rubric is designed to be used with a variety of assessment types, including but not limited to: culminating end-of-year projects,
student portfolios, rubrics for performance tasks, essays or journals, exhibitions or demonstrations, and multiple-choice tests.
The ‘MEETS EXPECTATIONS’ column (the shaded column in each strand representing the minimum level of assessment quality
expected) is a strong baseline to build from, and it most closely reflects the basic requirements in the previous Appraiser-Approved
Assessment Checklist. It is meant to help teachers identify specific areas where the assessment can be improved.
FIRST STRAND: ALIGNMENT & STRETCH
The Alignment and Stretch strand asks teachers to reflect on three key elements of any assessment:
A1: Standards Alignment -- Do tasks/items assess mastery as defined in the TEKS introduction for the course?*
*Courses that have other applicable standards, such as AP or IB, may use those standards instead.
A2: Process Standards -- Do tasks/items assess for major process standards for the course?
A3: Stretch -- Are low-end and high-end stretch tasks/items assessed for the course?
Criterion
1
2
3
4
Strand: Alignment & Stretch
A1. The assessment is aligned to
grade-level standards and, if
A1. The assessment is not
applicable*, items/tasks cover no
aligned
to
grade-level
TEKS
or
more than two key concepts in the
Standards Alignment
applicable standards*
Introduction (narrative) to the TEKS
for the course
A-1
A-2
Process Standards
A-3
Stretch
A1. The assessment is aligned to gradelevel standards and, if applicable,
items/tasks allow students to
demonstrate mastery of key concepts in
the Introduction (narrative) to the TEKS
for the course*
A2. Items/tasks adequately allow
A2. Items/tasks do not cover A2. Items/tasks insufficiently cover
students to demonstrate mastery of
process standards for the
major process standards for the
major process standards for the course
course. (If applicable)
course (if applicable)
(If applicable)
A3. There are either low or high
A3. Absence of low- and highstretch items/tasks from the same
end stretch** items/tasks
grade level.
A1. Items/tasks cover all and allow for
mastery of key concepts in the
Introduction to the TEKS or applicable
standards* for the course in a variety of
ways
A2. Items/tasks adequately allow students
to demonstrate mastery of major process
standards for the course in a variety of
ways (If applicable)
A3. There is a variety of interdisciplinary
A3. There are low and high-end stretch
low- and high-end stretch items/tasks
items/tasks from the same grade level
from other grades/levels
*Applicable standards such as –but not limited to - AP, IB or Pre-K standards, which are applicable to some courses in addition to, or in lieu of, TEKS)
**Stretch: to cover pre-requisite objectives from prior years to allow for spiraling, and objectives from the next year/course to allow for sufficient challenge.
2|Page
SECOND STRAND: RIGOR & COMPLEXITY
The Rigor & Complexity strand asks teachers to reflect on two questions:
R1: Critical Thinking -- How in depth do tasks/items assess the students’ critical and higher-order thinking? Does it provide
enough stretch items to challenge students at all levels?
R2: Problem Solving -- How in depth do tasks/items assess the students’ problem solving abilities?
Criterion
1
2
3
4
Strand: Rigor & Complexity
R1. Items/tasks and rubrics R1. Items/tasks and rubrics show
R1. Overall, the items/tasks and rubrics
R1. Overall, the items/tasks and
are not appropriately
some, but insufficient level of
are appropriately challenging.* A
rubrics are appropriately
challenging.* No
challenge. Only some items/tasks
majority of items/tasks require critical
challenging.* A majority of
items/tasks require critical require critical thinking,
thinking, application, evaluation, or
Critical Thinking
items/tasks require critical thinking,
thinking, application,
application, evaluation, or
synthesis, demonstrated in multiple
application, evaluation, or synthesis
evaluation, or synthesis
synthesis.
ways
R2. Items/tasks assessing R2. Items/tasks assessing key
R2. Items/tasks assessing key concepts
R2. Items/tasks assessing key
key concepts and process concepts and process standards
and process standards requiring multiconcepts and process standards
standards do not require
require some problem solving
step problem solving allow mastery to
require multi-step problem solving (If
Problem Solving problem solving (if
but may not be multi-step (If
be demonstrated in multiple ways (If
applicable)
applicable)
applicable)
applicable)
*Appropriately challenging: At the right level of Bloom’s Taxonomy/ Depth of Knowledge, and at the appropriate reading level (i.e. DRA, Lexile, AR, Reading A-Z,
Fry’s readability formula, Flesch-Kincaid, or any other applicable reading level standard selected by the teacher.
R-1
R-2
THIRD STRAND: FORMAT CAPTURES TRUE MASTERY
The True Mastery strand asks teachers to reflect on four questions:
T1: Rubric / Selected Response Quality -- How clearly articulated are the different levels of true mastery in the assessments’ scoring rubric? –
Or- Does the assessment answer key indicate specific objective alignment?
T2: Length and Format -- How appropriate are the length and format of the assessment for the subject and grade level?
T3: Clarity -- How clearly can this assessment’s language and expectations be understood by students and a teacher not familiar with the
content?
T4: Bias -- What is the evidence that this assessment is free of bias for all students?
3|Page
Criterion
1
2
3
4
Strand: True Mastery
T-1
T1. Rubrics with
indicators of what
students are expected to
know and do are not
present.
Rubric / Selected -or, for selected response:
Response Quality* Assessment does not have
an answer key
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
T1. Rubrics either articulate
what students are expected to
know and do, or differentiate
between levels of
knowledge/mastery [but may
not have indicators]
-or, for selected response:
Assessment has an answer key,
but does not indicate
corresponding objectives and/or
all questions are true/false
T1. Rubrics (1) articulate with
indicators what students are
expected to know and do, and
(2) differentiate between
levels of knowledge/mastery
-or, for selected responseAssessment has an answer key,
and indicates corresponding
objectives. Students are
expected to show their work to
receive full credit for responses.
T1. Rubrics (1) articulate with indicators
what students are expected to know and
do, (2) differentiate between levels of
knowledge/ mastery, and (3) include
examples of student work, showing what
mastery looks like at various levels
-or, for selected response Answer key indicates corresponding
objectives and identifies student
misunderstandings when selecting wrong
answers. (i.e. if answer choice ‘B’ is selected,
student is struggling with concept X)
T2. Multiple assessment formats, all
appropriate in expectations and length for
the course, provide diverse ways for
students to demonstrate mastery (i.e.
T2. Neither format nor
length are appropriate for
the subject and grade
level
T2. Either format or length are
appropriate for the subject and
grade level
T2. Format and length are
appropriate for the subject
and grade level
T3. Items/tasks are
unclear or unintelligible
for the student or
evaluator
T3. Portions of the
items/tasks/expectations, have
errors / typos, are unclear or
may lead to confusion for the
student and/or the evaluator
T3. Items/tasks/expectations
are free of errors, clear and
understandable for the
student and the evaluator
T3. Items/tasks/expectations are clear and
understandable. Where relevant, they are
illustrated by examples, models, or other
types of aids
T4. The wording or
knowledge of items/tasks
may not be accessible to
all student subgroups and
differentiation for ELLs or
students with disabilities
is not present
T4. The wording or knowledge
of items/tasks may not be
accessible to all student
subgroups or differentiation for
ELLs or students with disabilities
is not present
T4. Items/tasks are accessible
to all students, are absent
from bias, and there is
evidence of differentiation for
ELLs and students with
disabilities (Best practice: refer
T4. Items/tasks are not only clear,
understandable, and differentiated, but
also draw upon or include multiple
references to culturally diverse contexts
student may write a poem, compose/sing a
song, or create a poster to demonstrate
mastery)
to SPED student IEPs when
designing the assessment)
*An assessment may, but is not required to, include a combination of: performance tasks with a rubric, and selected response items, such as multiple choice, matching
items, true/false items. When the assessment includes only performance tasks or selected response items, refer to the relevant indicator in T-1
4|Page
The Moderated Peer Review Protocol
The moderated peer review protocol provides guidance to peer-reviewers with the goal of ensuring consistency
and reliability when evaluating assessments. It is designed to be used with the MPR Assessment Rubric as the
standard process to evaluate assessment quality and rigor by following four steps:
By yourself
STEP 1: Review & Compare
Identify the criterion to be scored
What is the rating in the rubric that you would assign to this criterion?
STEP 2: Find & Assign
Does the evidence match the expectations at the level you want to assign? If not, does it match the indicators
one level below? One level above?
Assign your score based on evidence; enter both in the assessment review form.
With a peer
STEP 3: Compare & Align
Discuss evidence with peers and come to a consensus on the evidence presented:
Is the evidence identified aligned to what the indicator is asking for?
Why should this rating not be one level above or below the current rating?
STEP 4: Document & Record
Agree on the evidence and assign a rating
Document the peer-reviewed score and cite the evidence that led you to it in the assessment review form.
Explain your rationale and record your feedback in the form.
Repeat this process for all 9 criteria
Criterion-Specific Guidance
A1
1.
2.
3.
A2
1.
2.
3.
A3
1.
2.
– Standards Alignment
Locate the Texas Assessment Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) or applicable standards1 for the course.
Review the introduction (narrative) for the course.
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: Do tasks/items assess mastery
as defined in the introduction (narrative) TEKS for the course?
– TEKS Process standards alignment
Locate the Texas Assessment Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for the course.
Math and Science TEKS have process standards. If the course does not have process standards, enter N/A
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: Do tasks/items assess for
major process standards for the course?
– Low-end / High-end Stretch
Locate the Texas Assessment Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for the course, one course above, and one course below. Or, if
available- refer to HISD’s Vertical alignment charts [login required]
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: Are low-end and high-end
stretch tasks/items assessed for the course?
R1 – Critical and Higher-Order Thinking
1.
2.
Refer to a Bloom’s Taxonomy chart , Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Wheel, and, if applicable, to the reading level
standard (such as Lexile, DRA, etc.) selected by the teacher.
After reviewing the assessment and the two resources above, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question:
How in depth do tasks/items assess the students’ critical and higher-order thinking?
R2 – Problem Solving
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: How do tasks/items assess the
students’ problem solving abilities? At what level of depth do they assess problem solving?
T1
– Rubric / Selected Response Quality
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: How clearly articulated are the
different levels of true mastery in the assessments’ scoring rubric? –Or- Does the assessment answer key indicate specific
objective alignment?
T2
– Length and Format
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: How appropriate are the length
and format of the assessment for the subject, grade level, and time allowed for completion?
T3
– Clarity
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: How clearly can this assessment’s
language and expectations be understood by students and by a teacher not familiar with the content?
T4
– Avoiding Bias
After reviewing the assessment, refer to the MPR rubric. Ask yourself the following question: What evidence shows the reader that this
assessment is accessible and free of bias for all students?
1
Some courses such as Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), and Pre-K follow standards other than TEKS. In such
cases, the applicable standards, and not TEKS, should be used to evaluate this criterion.
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
Grade Level(s)
Peer-Reviewer(s)
By Yourself
With a Peer
STEP 1: Review & Compare the assessment with the
Rubric indicators
STEP 3: Compare & Align discuss the evidence
and come to a consensus
STEP 2: Find & Assign a score based on evidence
STEP 4: Document & Record the final score based
on evidence
Criterion
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Standards
Alignment
A-2
Process
Standards
A-3
Evidence and Feedback
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Stretch
Consensus score ___
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Critical Thinking
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
R-2
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Problem Solving
Consensus score ___
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Meets Standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Length & Format
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-3
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Clarity
Consensus score ___
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Bias
Consensus score ___
7|Page
SAMPLE ASSESSMENTS AND SCORES:
Using evidence to inform the peer-review process
The following pages contain sample assessments and scores submitted by HISD teachers during the Moderated
Peer Review Pilot. These samples are illustrations of how the rubric can be used with a variety of assessments,
and show examples of the type of evidence and feedback that would be most helpful to include when discussing
assessment quality and rigor.
Some assessments and sample rubric comments were edited for clarity, alignment, and brevity. Only select
assessments used during the pilot were included due to space limitations.
8|Page
Sample Assessment # 1 High-School Social Studies – Journal Entries and Essay Response
Subject / Course
Teacher
Social Studies (IB Economics)
XX
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
11th and 12th
XX
Assessment Context
This is a high-school assessment used by an IB Economics teacher. It includes two main components: A journalentry assignment, and an essay in response to a challenging prompt. The teacher provides additional context:
“For IB Economics, the end of year evaluation consists of three essay projects in addition to a formal exam,
which is a timed essay. For in-class practice I have modified actual IB prompts for students to answer in the
same format as the IB exam. After the timed essay, we reveal and review the IB-like mark-scheme we designed
together to help build analytical, evaluative, and writing skills. Seeing a mark-scheme helps students understand
how their work will be evaluated by the IB examiners and further solidifies the expectations they must prepare
themselves to accomplish.”
INSTRUCTIONS/ASSIGNMENT FOR STUDENTS:
The Grapes of Wrath Dialectical Journal Assignment
Use John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath and begin the assignment below:
The journal will be due on the first day after the holiday break. When you return, you will write an essay in
class with your book and journal.
Your journal will use a two-entry form, your journal must be written and not typed.
Fold the page in half.
In the LEFT COLUMN, write down parts of paragraphs from our books and articles, quotes, or notes from
class that you think are interesting or important.
In the RIGHT COLUMN, write down YOUR OWN thoughts, commentary, and questions about what you
recorded in the LEFT COLUMN.
For assignment to receive full credit each entry must take up at least half of a page.
You must have a total of 30 entries (1 per chapter) in order to receive full credit.
It is a good idea to fold back pages of the book that interest you. You may want to save these spots to use for
textual evidence when you write your essay in class.
Please bring your book and completed journal with you on January 8th/9th.
Enjoy the novel!
9|Page
The Grapes of Wrath Essay < Timed Writing Assessment >
Pick the topic you feel you can be most successful answering. (If you have another topic in mind that you feel
passionate in writing about, please talk to me first.) Follow the checklist to make sure you have included
everything necessary.
1. Decide what qualities or characteristics John Steinbeck seems to value most in The Grapes of Wrath. Defend
your answer with at least three examples from the novel. Support your claim with at least three examples
from the text that you analyze to demonstrate your position.
2. Decide whether Steinbeck presents a vision of hope or despair for the future in the novel The Grapes of
Wrath. Step back from the story of the Joads to consider the bigger picture. In depicting the plight of the
Joads, and others like them, is Steinbeck optimistic or pessimistic about the future of working class America?
Support your claim with at least three examples from the text that you analyze to demonstrate your position.
3. In John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, he creates memorable American characters who encounter
crippling obstacles and overwhelming odds. Decide which character changes the most dramatically. Support
your claim with at least three examples from the text that you analyze to demonstrate your position.
Introduction
__The topic under discussion is introduced and
explained (5 pts)
__Title and author are mentioned; title is underlined or
italicized (5 pts)
__Terms are defined for the reader and background
on the book is provided (5 pts)
__A clear thesis statement offering a roadmap of the
essay is presented (10 pts)
Body Paragraph One
__Topic sentence includes transition (5 pts)
__ One-sentence summary helps reader understand
quote (5 pts)
__ Quotation or paraphrased evidence is embedded
(use MLA format for quotations) (5 pts)
__ At least one sentence thoroughly analyzes the
quotation (5 pts)
__ At least one sentence explains why the example
proves the thesis (5 pts)
Body Paragraph Two
__ Topic sentence includes transition (5 pts)
__ One-sentence summary helps reader understand
quote (5 pts)
__ Quotation or paraphrased evidence is embedded
(use MLA format for quotations) (5 pts)
__ At least one sentence thoroughly analyzes the
quotation (5 pts)
10 | P a g e
__ At least one sentence explains why the example
proves the thesis (5 pts)
Body Paragraph Three
__ Topic sentence includes transition from (5 pts)
__ One-sentence summary helps reader understand
quote (5 pts)
__ Quotation or paraphrased evidence is embedded
(use MLA format for quotations) (5 pts)
__ At least one sentence thoroughly analyzes the
quotation (5 pts)
__ At least one sentence explains why the example
proves the thesis (5 pts)
Conclusion
__ The thesis is not simply restated; instead, the writer
draws a conclusion based on essay (10 pts)
Organization & Mechanics
__ Evidence is logically presented (chronologically,
importance, location, etc.) (5 pts)
__ Spelling has been corrected, there are only a few
errors (5 pts)
__ Grammar is correct, there are only a few errors (5
pts)
__ Writing is in the present tense (5 pts)
__Written in the third person – no “I” or “in my opinion”
statements (5 pts)
Economics Concepts
(A) Using diagrams, distinguish between inflationary and recessionary (deflationary) gaps. (10 marks)
(B) Compare and contrast possible equilibrium outcomes in the macroeconomy using the neoclassical LRAS
curve and Keynesian AS curve. (15 marks)
Instructions for teacher: Go over this in class with the class, make sure to use mark schemes and have two
other people grade with the mark scheme, average out the two scores.
Mark scheme
For A:
There is a definition of an inflationary gap (2pt)
There is a definition for a recessionary gap (2pts)
There is a diagram labeled showing inflationary gaps (1pt)
There is a diagram labeled showing recessionary gaps (1pt)
The diagram is mentioned in the writing (1pt)
The writer explains the difference between inflationary and recessionary gaps (3pts)
10 total
For B:
Student explains the neoclassical LRAS curve with different equilibrium caused by shifts in SRAS (1pts)
Student uses diagram with LRAS curve and different shifts of SRAS to illustrate different equilibriums (1pts)
Student explains diagram and shifts in essay (1pts)
Student mentions how shifts of SRAS cause inflationary and deflationary gaps (2pts)
Student discusses the eventual elimination of gaps toward an inevitable long-run LRAS (2pts)
An explanation that Keynesian model shows that price level does not fall but demand shifts (1pts)
Use of Keynesian diagram & words explaining segment I, (real GDP is low, companies can produce more)
(1pt.)
Use of Keynesian diagram & words explaining segment II (price level increases, employment and output
increase to meet potential GDP) (1pt)
Use of Keynesian diagram & words explaining segment III) (price level increase rapidly, output cannot
increase anymore (1pt)
Explanation of AD causing a recessionary gap with text and use of diagram (1pts)
Explanation of AD causing an inflationary gap using text and use of diagram (1pts)
Explanation of AD shifting to potential output using text and use of diagram (2pt)
15 points total
25 all together
<End of Sample Assessment #1>
11 | P a g e
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
Social Studies (IB Economics)
XX
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
11th and 12th
XX
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Standards Alignment
A-2
Process Standards
A-3
Stretch
Assigned tasks cover most, and allow for mastery of key concepts of TEKS.
Problem Solving
T-1
T-2
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3
The task/rubric is appropriately challenging for upper level high school. Critical thinking, application and
evaluation are evident in the task at hand. However, it does not allow for those students who are not strong
writers to demonstrate subject mastery.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
Minimum score is 3
Students have to use evidence from the text to explain their points of view, as well as make connections to
explain how the graphs differ from one another. Rationale is apparent when assessing the final product.
Note from peer: The assessment does not require problem solving mastery to be demonstrated in multiple
ways, only through the writing process, and for that reason I have given this criterion a score of 3. Allowing
for other ways to demonstrate mastery would bring this score to a 4.
1
3 4
Consensus score 3
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3
Minimum score is 3
Student expectations are very clear and the rubric spells out what to do on their essay. The rubric does not
include examples of what a successful product looks like. The product does differentiate between levels of
mastery.
Note from peer: I don’t see the levels of mastery differentiated in the rubric. I agree that there is a list of
expectations, but it is unclear to me what mastery looks like: Do you expect all students to receive a perfect
score? How can you tell which of the expectations show that any given mastery level has been achieved? It
is a very robust assessment instrument, but lacks clarity to distinguish between mastery levels, which is
ultimately what you want a rubric to be able to tell you. Additionally, there was no answer key / TEKS
alignment provided
Appropriate for upper level high school, but it lacks multiple ways to assess.
Expectations are clear and understandable, especially with the essay and its explicit instructions. One way
to improve clarity even further is to include a few journal entry examples to illustrate.
Note from peer: I agree, including examples would take this to a ‘4’.
T-4
There is no evidence of differentiation for the ELL/Special Need populations.
Note from peer/appraiser: I agree. I recommend you consider including at least two differentiation
strategies for your ELL students before we re-assess this criterion next week. I understand that you don’t
have any students with Special Needs in this course?
12 | P a g e
1
3 4
Note from peer: While it is true that they could tackle projects from an interdisciplinary approach, I don’t see
evidence that this is intentional or that the assignment is designed with this purpose in mind. If you did design
it with that intent, it would be helpful to call this out explicitly in the instructions for the students or in the
assessment context.
Clarity
Bias
2 3 4
English and math cross curricular potential. Students can tackle the projects from an interdisciplinary
approach.
Length & Format
T-3
Peer:
Peer:
True Mastery
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
2
The task (essay), the preparation for the essay, and the mark schemes for economics concepts (inflationary
vs. recessionary diagrams; comparing and contrasting equilibrium outcomes) allow students to demonstrate
mastery of major process standards for IB economics
Critical Thinking
R-2
Minimum score is 3
Teacher: 1
Consensus score 3
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Score
Refer to rubric || circle one
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score 2
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score 3
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score 2
Sample Assessment # 2 – High School Web Technologies Student Project and Portfolio
Subject / Course
Teacher
Web Technologies
XX
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
9th – 12th
XX
Web Technologies Final Exam Project
Assessment Context
This high school Web Technologies assessment is a
student project / portfolio that is developed throughout
the school year. Only selected content is included,
but you may access the full assessment here.
In addition to providing the students with clear
expectations and a project timeline, the teacher has
developed robust rubrics and progress benchmarks to
ensure that students are meeting deadlines.
The table of contents on the left provides a detailed
breakdown of the performance tasks the students are
expected to master by the end of the course. The
following pages show select portions of the
assessment.
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
15 | P a g e
16 | P a g e
POINTS AWARDED ________ + 10 = __________ Website Score
<End of Sample Assessment #2>
17 | P a g e
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
Web Technologies
XX
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
9th – 12th
XX
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Covers web graphics, html, design, problem solving in the detailed steps and requirements outlined for students
Standards
Alignment
A-2
TEKS do not outline process standards for the course
Process
Standards
A-3
Stretch
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score N/A
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Prerequisite skills from graphic design course required for developing logos for non-profit organizations, Several
tasks allow students to stretch to the high-end in their final products.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _4_
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Selecting non-profit organization, identify mission statement, identify appropriate color scheme, design new
logos, evaluate logo designs, compose memo for approval, develop website using HTML coding.
Critical Thinking
R-2
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _4_
All items listed above in critical thinking require multiple steps.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Problem Solving
Consensus score _4_
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Meets Standards = 3
Final website rubric includes levels of mastery and outlines indicators, but does not have examples of what each
level of mastery should look like. Also, it is not clear what expectations distinguish levels 3 and 4.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Logo design, contact sheet, final website, memo, and soft skills are all evaluated in a cumulative semester long
assessment of appropriate length. Rubric includes time management, interest and other categories that will help
students who struggle with technical skills.
Clear instructions with relevant illustrated examples (as shown on page 7 of the instructions).
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _4_
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Clarity
Consensus score _4_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-4
Bias
Several items and requirements work for all students at all levels. The teacher offers support through small
group tutorials throughout the school year as part of a differentiation strategy helping the course’s ELLs
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3__
18 | P a g e
Sample Assessment # 3 High School Dance – Performance-based Rubric
Subject / Course
Teacher
Dance I
XX
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
High School
XX
The teacher uses a rubric to define performance levels for a dance class final performance
Group _____
Students will demonstrate excellence in the following areas of dance performance:
Outcome
Excellent
Good
Needs
Improvement
Unsatisfactory
Body Skills
All movements
are memorized
and performed
with control and
skill 85% or
more.
The movements
are most often
memorized and
performed with
some control and
skill 75%-85%.
The movements
are somewhat
memorized and
performed with
little control and
skill 51%-75%.
The movements are
not memorized and
performed without
control and skill 50%
or less.
Composition/
Structure
The composition
has a clean and
clearly defined
window
formation at all
times 85% or
more.
The composition
has somewhat
clean window
formation. (One
person out of
window formation)
75% - 85%.
The composition
has a loosely
defined window
formation. (Two
or more out of
window
formation) 51% 75%.
The composition lacks
window formation.
(Three or more out of
window formation)
30% or less.
Performance
The dancer is
focused,
concentrated,
and committed to
the performance
of the movement
85% or more.
The dancer is
often focused,
concentrated and
committed to the
performance of
the movement
75% or less.
The dancer is
seldom focused,
concentrated to
the performance
of the movement
50% or less.
The dancer is not
focused, concentrated
nor committed to the
performance of the
movement 30% or les
Dressed Out
3/0
Chewing Gum
Hair pulled back
Behavior
Grading
13 - 15 = 90-100
10 – 12 = 80-89
9 – 6 = 70-79
5 – 0 = 69
Scoring
points
Total
5
4
3
2
15
12
9
6
<End of Sample Assessment #3>
19 | P a g e
3 /0
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
Dance I
X
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Peer-Reviewer(s)
High School
X
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Standards
Alignment
A-2
Process
Standards
A-3
The performance assesses for “control and skill”, not only memorization, thus allowing students to demonstrate
mastery. However, it only covers two of the four basic strands mentioned in the TEKS introduction to Dance I:
perception and creative expression. It does not assess for historical and cultural heritage, or critical evaluation.
N/A Process standard not outlined in the course’s TEKS.
Rubric ranged from unsatisfactory or baseline to excellent, though the expectations do not allow for
interdisciplinary integration.
R-2
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _2_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _3_
Rigor & Complexity
Critical Thinking
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
Consensus score N/A
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Stretch
R-1
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
The design or language of the rubric does indicate how mastery can be demonstrated in multiple ways, though
the performance-based assessment does require students to demonstrate critical thinking ability through
application, evaluation, and synthesis.
The rubric is designed to address more than 2 categories and multiple key concepts.
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Problem Solving
Consensus score _3_
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
Meets Standards = 3
The rubric includes indicators and differentiates between levels of mastery, but does not reference examples of
student work. (These could be included if the teacher used video exemplars of what each mastery level looks
like).
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
3 4
Format is appropriate, but length is not specified. Neither does the rubric specify if students are allowed
to select different types of dance.
Peer:
2 3 4
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 2__
The rubric would be made more clear if it included a set of instructions outlining the type of dance
performances being evaluated, length of the performance, etc. Additionally, certain descriptors seem to
contradict each other. For example, an excellent score for composition reads: “ The composition has a
clean and clearly defined window formation at all times 85% or more,” and thus lead to confusion
about how this can be achieved.
While the concepts, expectations, and wording of the performance being assessed seems accessible to all
students, the rubric lacks evidence of differentiation for ELLs or students with disabilities. Said differentiation
may be present in the teacher’s planning, but it is not evidenced by this instrument.
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score 2__
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _2_
20 | P a g e
Sample Assessment # 4 – High School Pre AP ART I; Portfolio Assessment
Subject / Course
Teacher
ART I – Pre-AP
X
Grade Level(s)
Peer-Reviewer(s)
9th – 12th
X
Assessment Context
The teacher uses a portfolio assessment as an end of year evaluation. Students must include “5 to 7 of their
best pieces.”
Portfolio Assessment
Artist Statements
For your final you will need to create a portfolio project of your artwork from the semester. You may create a poster, a
booklet, or a digital presentation of your artwork. You must include 5-7 of your best pieces. For each piece you must
include the artist statement.
Directions for the ARTIST STATEMENT:
1. Title: _________________________________________________________
2. Portfolio requirements met: List all that apply
CONTOUR
PORTRAIT
PERSPECTIVE
VALUE
COLOR THEORY
3. Media (materials used): _________________________________________________
4. Artist Statement:
What appealed to you about this piece? How did you use the elements of art to create a good
composition? What is the focal point of the image? What discoveries did you make when creating the piece? Were the
materials easy to work with or did they cause you to struggle? Are you happy with your final piece or is there anything
you would change? Why?
21 | P a g e
Final Portfolio Project: Fall Exam
STUDENT SELFEVALUATION
Artist Statements
Poster, Booklet,
or slide Design
Quality portfolio
requirements
Work ethic &
Clean up
A
100-90
Unique &
Creative titles,
articulate artist
statements
Unique &
Creative layout
and design
Creative and
unique pieces for
all portfolio
requirements
Concentrated &
diligent work
ethic, returned all
supplies, cleaned
work space
B
89-80
Original & Thoughtful
title & artist statements
C
79-70
Unoriginal & Incomplete
title & artist statements
F
69-50
Missing title & artist
statements
Original & Thoughtful
layout and design
Messy & Incomplete
layout and design
Missing layout and
design
Completed pieces for
all portfolio
requirements
Some pieces complete,
but others may be
unfinished portfolio
requirements
Sporadic and
inconsistent work ethic,
rarely returned supplies
or cleaned work space
Missing portfolio
requirements
Mostly strong work
ethic, returned most
supplies, cleaned some
Very little work ethic
displayed, does not
return supplies or clean
work space
1. What is your best piece in the portfolio? What elements and principles of design did you employ to
create a strong piece?
2. What is your weakest piece in the portfolio? What could you do to make the piece stronger?
TEACHER
EVALUATION
Artist
Statements
A
100-90
Unique & Creative titles,
articulate artist
statements
Unique & Creative
layout and design
B
89-80
Original & Thoughtful
title & artist statements
C
79-70
Unoriginal & Incomplete
title & artist statements
F
69-50
Missing title & artist
statements
Original & Thoughtful
layout and design
Messy & Incomplete
layout and design
Missing layout and
design
Quality
portfolio
requirements
Creative and unique
pieces for all portfolio
requirements
Completed pieces for
all portfolio
requirements
Missing portfolio
requirements
Work ethic &
Clean up
Concentrated & diligent
work ethic, returned all
supplies, cleaned work
space
Mostly strong work
ethic, returned most
supplies, cleaned some
Some pieces complete,
but others may be
unfinished portfolio
requirements
Sporadic and
inconsistent work ethic,
rarely returned supplies
or cleaned work space
Poster,
Booklet, or
slide Design
Score: __________
Teacher Comments:
<End of Sample Assessment #4>
22 | P a g e
Very little work
ethic displayed,
does not return
supplies or clean
work space
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
ART I – Pre-AP
X
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Peer-Reviewer(s)
9th – 12th
X
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
Evidence of three of the four major components on the TEKS introduction: Perception, Creative
Expression/Performance, and Response/Evaluation. No evidence of Historical/Cultural Heritage:
A-1
Standards
Alignment
A-2
Process
Standards
A-3
Stretch
Perception “Artist Statement: What appealed to you about this piece? How did you use the elements of art to
create a good composition? What is the focal point of the image? What discoveries did you make when creating
the piece? Were the materials easy to work with or did they cause you to struggle? Are you happy with your final
piece or is there anything you would change? Why?”
Creative expression/performance “create a portfolio project of your artwork”
Response/evaluation. “What is your best piece in the portfolio? What elements and principles of design did you
employ to create a strong piece? What is your weakest piece in the portfolio? What could you do to make the
piece stronger?”
N/A. Process standards not outlined in TEKS.
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score N/A
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
The teacher allows students the flexibility to create work in several formats (“You may create a poster, a booklet,
or a digital presentation of your artwork”), but there is no evidence of interdisciplinary connections.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3_
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Critical Thinking
R-2
Problem Solving
“You may create a poster, a booklet, or a digital presentation of your artwork. You must include 5-7 of your best
pieces. For each piece you MUST INCLUDE THE ARTIST STATEMENT.”
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Portfolio evaluated work in artist statement, self-evaluation rubric, and the reflective questions
Problem solving was addressed when students created original pieces. Instructor could have added instructions
for students to improve work that was not done well the first time around before submitting it in the portfolio.
Developing “a digital presentation of your artwork”
Consensus score _4_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _3_
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Length & Format
Meets Standards = 3
Students had the opportunity to explain why they evaluated themselves with the scores they chose on the selfevaluation rubric. Rubric is well written and shows differentiation and indicators, but there is no evidence of
examples of student work.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Length and format are adequate. Students are allowed to use multiple formats: creating a portfolio, presenting
their portfolio in digital format, and drafting an artist statement and reflective piece.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _4_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
Instructions and rubrics are well-written and easy to understand for students, though they do not include
examples of what mastery may look like at different levels.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3__
There are multiple ways to complete the assessment, which allows special populations to have creative freedom
and serve as evidence of differentiation. However, these formats but do not draw upon or include references to
culturally diverse contexts.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score 3__
23 | P a g e
Sample Assessment # 5 English II, 10th Grade: Selected and Short Answer Response
Subject / Course
Teacher
English II
XX
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
10th
XX
Assessment Context
This assessment includes a combination of selected response (multiple choice, matching) and short answer response
items.
iLit Literary Review & Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare
10TH Grade Spring 2015 Final Examination
Section 1: iLit Literary Review & Julius Caesar Multiple Choice
Directions: Read each question and select the appropriate answer.
1. Who wrote the play Julius Caesar?
a. Plutarch
b. John Spears
c. William Shakespeare
d. None of the above.
6. Who is Brutus’s loyal man-servant?
a. Lucius
b. Titinius
c. Pindarus
2. That is the name of the famous London theater in which
many of Shakespeare’s play were performed?
a. Renaissance
b. The Globe
c. The Metropolitan Opera
d. Stratford-on-Avon
7. Who is the major protagonist in the play?
a. Antony
b. Cassius
c. Brutus
d. Caesar
3. Why did the conspirators want Brutus to join them?
a. He is close to Caesar
b. He will make the people accept the
assassination
c. He is the only one who will murder Caesar
d. He will be the next ruler of Rome
8. What does the Soothsayer’s warning involve?
a. The ides of March
b. Pompey’s return
c. The names of the conspirators
d. Caesar’s rise to the throne
4. Who stabbed Caesar first from behind?
a. Antony
b. Brutus
c. Cassius
d. Casca
5. In his funeral oration, what reason does Brutus give to
explain why he killed Caesar?
a. He loved Caesar
b. Caesar was too rich
c. Caesar was a coward
d. Caesar was too ambitious
24 | P a g e
9. Who offered the crown to Caesar?
a. Casca
b. Metellus Cimber
c. Antony
d. Flavius
10. How many times was Caesar offered the crown?
a. once
b. twice
c. three times
11. Who finally helps Brutus commit suicide?
a. Clitus
b. Varro
c. Strato
14. What is a struggle between opposing forces know as?
a. irony
b. conflict
c. imagery
12. What is true of Caesar?
a. He was superstitious
b. He believed in augurers
c. He was a brilliant military man
d. all of the above
15.
According to Shakespeare, who is the only
conspirator who acts from unselfish motives?
a. Cassius
b. Brutus
c. Casca
13. Whose job was it to get Caesar to the Senate House
on the Ides of March?
a. Casca
b. Decius
c. Trebonius
16. Why is it ironic that Caesar fell at the base of
Pompey’s statue?
a. Pompey had sworn to kill Caesar
b. Caesar had come to power by defeating Pompey
c. Pompey had also been stabbed by conspirators
Section II: Julius Caesar Matching Directions: Match each quote to its speaker from Acts 2 & 3.
17. “This was the noblest Roman of them all.
All the conspirators, save only he,
Did that they did in envy of great Caesar;
He, only in a general honest thought
And common good to all, made one of them.
His life was gentle, and the elements
So mixed in him that Nature might stand up
And say to all the world, “This was a man!”
18. “Tis better that the enemy seek us.
So shall he waste his means, weary his soldiers,
Doing himself offense, whilst we, lying still,
Are full of rest, defense, and nimbleness.”
19. “Cowards die many times before their deaths,
The valiant never taste of death but once.”
20. “Within the bond of marriage, tell me Brutus,
is it expected I should know no secrets that appertain to you?.”
21. “What mean you, Caesar? Think you to walk forth?
You shall not stir out of your house today.”
25 | P a g e
A. Brutus
B. Anthony
C. Portia
D. Calpurnia
E. Cesar
Section III: Julius Caesar Short Answer Response
Directions: Choose TWO questions below to write a 5-8 sentence short answer response.
Write the number of your response and your response to the prompt on the back of the scantron. Include as
many details as possible in your response.
22.
A work of literature may contain more than one conflict. Brutus and Cassius, for example, have several conflicts
with each other in The Tragedy of Julius Caesar. Discuss two of the conflicts between Brutus and Cassius. Tell how each
conflict is resolved and what these conflicts reveal about each character.
23.
A tragedy is a special kind of drama. Define tragedy and describe its characteristics.
Explain why The Tragedy of Julius Caesar fits the definition of tragedy.
24.
Who the main character of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar is can be considered a matter for debate. In your
opinion, who is the noble hero of this play, Caesar or Brutus? Use information from the play to support your argument.
Be sure to include a description of the hero’s tragic flaw.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Section IV: iLit Literary Review Unit 6
Directions: Read each selection summary OR quote and then select the appropriate TEXT.
25. “I never lost hope that the great transformation would occur. Not only because of the great heroes I have already
cited, but because of the courage of the ordinary men and women of my country.”
a. Irena Sendler, The Smuggler
b. Nelson Mandela, The Meaning of Courage
c. Shelby Faro, Variation
d. Farah Ahmedi, On the Other Side of the Sky
26. “What a dazzling site sight it was for a seventeen-year-old girl who had lived most of her life in Afghanistan and in the
refugee camps of Pakistan. I had never seen anything like it-“
a. Farah Ahmedi, On the Other Side of the Sky
b. Shelby Faro, Variation
c. Nelson Mandela, The Meaning of Courage
d. Irena Sendler, The Smuggler
27. Read the paragraph below and determine which TEXT this summary came from:
She spent the rest of the war working for Zegota, under assumed names, and continued to help children and families as a
social worker after the war. But it wasn’t until the mid-1960s that organizations including the Jewish Foundation for the
Righteous, began giving awards financial assistance.
a. Nelson Mandela, The Meaning of Courage
b. Irena Sendler, The Smuggler
c. Shelby Faro, Variation
d. Farah Ahmedi, On the Other Side of the Sky
26 | P a g e
Section V: iLit Vocabulary Review Unit 6 Matching
Directions: Read each vocabulary word and definition. Using the word bank below to match each word.
29. V. brought, took, carried or something secretly to a place it was not allowed
30. Adj. wrapped tightly in clothes in blankets to keep warm and protected
31. N. people who are paid to accompany others to deliver information or packages
32. N. a long period of being cruelly or unfairly; the act of treating people in a cruel
and unfair way
33. N. a complete change in someone or something in from or appearance
34. N. something valuable that is promised to be given over if the owner cannot pay
the money back
35. N. the state of having very little money
36. N. small groups of people within a larger group of whose ideas are different from
other members in the group
37. V. to stare stupidly
38. V. changed into something new or different
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
Section VI: iLit Literary Review Unit 1 Text or Main Idea Concepts
Directions: Read the question below and write a 3-5 sentence short answer response.
39. Define consumerism and provide an example of either a good or service that people can buy.
Section VII: Research and Literary Analysis Methods
Directions: Read each question and circle the correct answer.
40. The process of taking the research that has been done and writing it out and in expository:
a. Revising
b. Drafting
c. Conclusion
d. Commentary
41. Recording the ideas found from a source in one’s own words:
a. Quotation
b. Controlling idea
c. Paraphrase
d. Summary
<End of Sample Assessment #5>
27 | P a g e
Collateral
Couriers
Factions
Gawk
Morphed
Oppression
Penury
Smuggled
Swaddled
Transformation
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
English II
XX
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
10th
XX
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Standards
Alignment
A-2
Process
Standards
A-3
Stretch
The exam asks students to prove evidence of reading texts and demonstrate proficiency at writing: “write a 5-8
sentence short answer” about topics in Julius Caesar. Identify the speaker of various passages. While it covers
4 of the key concepts in the TEKS Introduction, it does not address the remaining two: research, and
listening/speaking
Students can demonstrate writing skills on the writing items (23-25); however, they cannot show process easily
through the exam, so it does not cover mastery of process standards.
Critical Thinking
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score 3__
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _2_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Many multiple choice items focus on identification or easy reading comprehension (who was the play written by,
Brutus says he kills Caesar because…, etc.); some ask to demonstrate the reason behind an action or idea or to
analyze/create an argument (17—ironic because; written answers, explain why the play is a tragedy, make an
argument about who is the main character).
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
Only 1-2 items on the test go beyond recall: item 25 asks to give an opinion and “support your argument;” item
17 asks to choose the reason why something in the play is ironic.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 2__
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _2_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
R-2
Problem Solving
Writing tasks include problem-solving and multiple steps (25. offer an opinion, support it with evidence, organize
the writing), but all other items (reading strand) do not require problem-solving, just recall.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _2_
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
28 | P a g e
Meets Standards = 3
There is no rubric for the writing items included, answer key for multiple choice, or instructions to students as to
how they will be scored.
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _1_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
There are various formats (writing and multiple choice) that are appropriate for 10th grade (mirrors STAAR),
though neither really allows for mastery. The length of the test is reasonable and perhaps short based on similar
grade level assessments for similar courses (30 questions, including two writing questions)
Peer:
While a rubric and answer key are needed, the process and delivery is clear and easy to follow for
students and instructors (Clearly marked “Directions: Match each quote…” etc. However, no examples of
mastery are given.
Peer:
There are many questions that could be answered by a student who comprehended only the plot or basic
language of the text (ID questions 1-17). The short answers provide opportunities for students of differing levels,
the quote-identification in particular are hard to access for ELLs and would require a supplemental modification,
which is not present. (2)
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3__
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 2__
Sample Assessment # 6: French I, High School – Performance-based with writing and speaking components
Subject / Course
Teacher
French I
XX
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
High School
XX
Assessment Context
While this is an assessment for a French course, the directions, tasks, and objectives are written in English for
the purpose of this exercise. This teacher includes a writing and a speaking component in the assessment, thus
increasing the level of rigor.
French 1 End of Year Essay
Objectives:
1. The learner will be able to describe him or herself, talk about what he or she likes to do, talk about his or her family,
and describe where he or she lives using the present tense in French.
2. The learner will be able to describe actions in the past in French using the passé composé.
Task: Respond to both prompts.
Prompt 1: Imagine you are introducing yourself to a new French pen pal. Present yourself as thoroughly as possible. What
is your name? How old are you? When is your birthday? What do you look like? How is your personality? Where do you
live? What is it like there (weather, population, etc.)? What is your family like? What are some things you like to do in your
free time? Don’t forget to ask your new friend some questions. Write at least 25 sentences. Answer in French. Use the
present tense.
Prompt 2: Imagine that last weekend was the best weekend ever! What did you do? Where did you go? Use a minimum of
ten different verbs to describe your weekend. Answer in French. Use the passé composé.
Rubric and Scoring:
Content
5 The writing responds completely to the prompt (20 points)
4 The writing responds to nearly all of the prompt (18 points)
3 The writing responds to most of the prompt (16 points)
2 The writing responds minimally to the prompt (14 points)
1 The writing does not respond to the prompt (12 points)
0 Little to no response or incomprehensible response (0-10 points)
Comprehensibility (vocabulary)
5 The response is completely comprehensible (20 points)
4 There are very few errors, which do not impede comprehension (18 points)
3 There are few errors, which do not impede comprehension (16 points)
2 Some errors, which impede comprehension (14 points)
1 Many errors, which impede comprehension (12 points)
0 Little to no response or incomprehensible response (0-10 points)
Accuracy (spelling and grammar)
5 No spelling or grammar errors (20 points)
4 Very few errors, which do not impede comprehension (18 points)
3 Few errors, which do not impede comprehension (16 points)
2 Some errors, which impede comprehension (14 points)
1 Many errors, which impede comprehension (12 points)
0 Little to no response or incomprehensible response (0-10 points)
Organization
5 Logical organization (20 points)
4 Generally organized with minor problems (18 points)
3 Minimal organizational problems (16 points)
2 Many organizational problems, which do not impede comprehension (14 points)
29 | P a g e
1 Many organizational problems, which impede comprehension (12 points)
0 Little to no response or incomprehensible response (0-10 points)
Originality
5 Original and creative response, varied vocabulary, stretches the limits of structures learned (20 points)
4 Original response, varied vocabulary (18 points)
3 Original response, limited vocabulary (16 points)
2 Repetitive, very limited vocabulary (14 points)
1 Extremely limited vocabulary (12 points)
0 Little to no response or incomprehensible response (0-10 points)
<End of Sample Assessment #6>
30 | P a g e
MPR Assessment Peer Review Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
French I
XX
Criterion
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
High School
XX
Evidence and Feedback
Alignment and Stretch
A-1
Standards
Alignment
A-2
Process
Standards
A-3
Stretch
The focus is on writing skills (write 25 sentences, use 10 verbs in writing) and maybe some showing (describe
yourself). No listening/speaking component; DOES address many cultural/descriptive TEKS, but not other
communication strands (1A and 1C)
Peer Review
Refer to rubric || circle one
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score _3_
N/A. TEKS do not reference process standards
Teacher: 1
2 3 4
Peer:
2 3 4
1
Consensus score N/A
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Students have the ability to demonstrate their own level through writing. There are not a variety of items, but
there is sufficient opportunity for low and high end students to perform.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score _3_
Rigor & Complexity
R-1
Critical Thinking
R-2
Problem Solving
Two writing tasks both ask students to apply their understanding of verb forms (use present tense or use passe
compose) to describe their own experience or appearance—covers application and synthesis. To some level
they are evaluating the usefulness of verbs in context as well. Critical thinking—making it grammatically correct
Students have to create a description of themselves, locate the appropriate French vocabulary, and then
organize the information to communicate it clearly. From English to French, students are expected to consider
actions, then put their ideas in a sentence.
Meets standards = 3
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 3__
True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Meets Standards = 3
Rubric includes both criteria (content, comprehensibility) and indicators (completely, nearly all, most, minimally,
does not). It lacks examples of what mastery looks like at each level.
Teacher: 1
2
Peer:
2 3 4
1
3 4
Consensus score _3_
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
Format is limited—should include speaking/listening as major component of a beginner level course (2)
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Length & Format
Consensus score 2__
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-3
Rubric and instructions are straight-forward and clear
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Clarity
Consensus score 3__
Teacher: 1 2 3 4
T-4
Bias
Language is simple and accessible to all French language learners, but no differentiation notes are available
and it is unclear whether they exist.
Peer:
1
2 3 4
Consensus score 2__
31 | P a g e
Appendices
32 | P a g e
APPENDIX 1: Printable MPR Assessment Rubric (Two-Sided)
Criterion
1
2
3
4
Strand: Alignment & Stretch
A1. The assessment is aligned to
grade-level standards and, if
A1. The assessment is not
applicable*, items/tasks cover no
aligned to grade-level TEKS or more than two key concepts in the
Standards Alignment
applicable standards*
Introduction (narrative) to the TEKS
for the course
A-1
A-2
Process Standards
A-3
Stretch
A1. The assessment is aligned to gradelevel standards and, if applicable,
items/tasks allow students to
demonstrate mastery of key concepts in
the Introduction (narrative) to the TEKS
for the course*
A2. Items/tasks adequately allow
A2. Items/tasks do not cover A2. Items/tasks insufficiently cover
students to demonstrate mastery of
process standards for the
major process standards for the
major process standards for the course
course. (If applicable)
course (if applicable)
(If applicable)
A3. There are either low or high
A3. Absence of low- and highstretch items/tasks from the same
end stretch** items/tasks
grade level.
A1. Items/tasks cover all and allow for
mastery of key concepts in the
Introduction to the TEKS or applicable
standards* for the course in a variety of
ways
A2. Items/tasks adequately allow students
to demonstrate mastery of major process
standards for the course in a variety of
ways (If applicable)
A3. There is a variety of interdisciplinary
A3. There are low and high-end stretch
low- and high-end stretch items/tasks
items/tasks from the same grade level
from other grades/levels
*Applicable standards such as –but not limited to - AP, IB or Pre-K standards, which are applicable to some courses in addition to, or in lieu of, TEKS)
**Stretch: to cover pre-requisite objectives from prior years to allow for spiraling, and objectives from the next year/course to allow for sufficient challenge.
Criterion
1
2
3
4
Strand: Rigor & Complexity
R1. Items/tasks and rubrics
R1. Items/tasks and rubrics show
R1. Overall, the items/tasks and rubrics R1. Overall, the items/tasks and rubrics are
are not appropriately
some, but insufficient level of
are appropriately challenging.* A
appropriately challenging.* A majority of
challenging.* No items/tasks
challenge. Only some items/tasks
majority of items/tasks require critical items/tasks require critical thinking,
Critical Thinking require critical thinking,
require critical thinking, application, thinking, application, evaluation, or
application, evaluation, or synthesis,
application, evaluation, or
evaluation, or synthesis.
synthesis
demonstrated in multiple ways
synthesis
R2. Items/tasks assessing key R2. Items/tasks assessing key
R2. Items/tasks assessing key concepts and
concepts and process
concepts and process standards
R2. Items/tasks assessing key concepts process standards requiring multi-step
standards do not require
require some problem solving but
and process standards require multiproblem solving allow mastery to be
Problem Solving problem solving (if
may not be multi-step (If
step problem solving (If applicable)
demonstrated in multiple ways (If
applicable)
applicable)
applicable)
*Appropriately challenging: At the right level of Bloom’s Taxonomy/ Depth of Knowledge, and at the appropriate reading level (i.e. DRA, Lexile, AR, Reading A-Z, Fry’s
readability formula, Flesch-Kincaid, or any other applicable reading level standard selected by the teacher.
R-1
R-2
33 | P a g e
Shaded criteria represent the minimum level required for assessment quality. This rubric was developed with district and teacher input during phase 1 of the 2015
Moderated Peer Review pilot. It is designed as a development tool to support teachers and should not be used for appraisal purposes. Originally based on the work of
Paul Bambrick-Santoyo in ‘Driven by Data: A Practical Guide to Improve Instruction’ [John Wiley, 2010]. | Last Updated: 07.27.15
Criterion
1
2
3
T1. Rubrics with
indicators of what
students are expected to
know and do are not
present.
T1. Rubrics either articulate
what students are expected to
know and do, or differentiate
between levels of
knowledge/mastery [but may
not have indicators]
-or, for selected response:
Assessment has an answer key,
but does not indicate
corresponding objectives and/or
all questions are true/false
4
Strand: True Mastery
T-1
Rubric / Selected -or, for selected response:
Response Quality* Assessment does not have
an answer key
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
T1. Rubrics (1) articulate with
indicators what students are
expected to know and do, and
(2) differentiate between
levels of knowledge/mastery
-or, for selected responseAssessment has an answer key,
and indicates corresponding
objectives. Students are
expected to show their work to
receive full credit for responses.
T1. Rubrics (1) articulate with indicators
what students are expected to know and
do, (2) differentiate between levels of
knowledge/ mastery, and (3) include
examples of student work, showing what
mastery looks like at various levels
-or, for selected response Answer key indicates corresponding
objectives and identifies student
misunderstandings when selecting wrong
answers. (i.e. if answer choice ‘B’ is selected,
student is struggling with concept X)
T2. Multiple assessment formats, all
appropriate in expectations and length for
the course, provide diverse ways for
students to demonstrate mastery (i.e.
T2. Neither format nor
length are appropriate for
the subject and grade
level
T2. Either format or length are
appropriate for the subject and
grade level
T2. Format and length are
appropriate for the subject
and grade level
T3. Items/tasks are
unclear or unintelligible
for the student or
evaluator
T3. Portions of the
items/tasks/expectations, have
errors / typos, are unclear or
may lead to confusion for the
student and/or the evaluator
T3. Items/tasks/expectations
are free of errors, clear and
understandable for the
student and the evaluator
T3. Items/tasks/expectations are clear and
understandable. Where relevant, they are
illustrated by examples, models, or other
types of aids
T4. The wording or
knowledge of items/tasks
may not be accessible to
all student subgroups and
differentiation for ELLs or
students with disabilities
is not present
T4. The wording or knowledge
of items/tasks may not be
accessible to all student
subgroups or differentiation for
ELLs or students with disabilities
is not present
T4. Items/tasks are accessible
to all students, are absent
from bias, and there is
evidence of differentiation for
ELLs and students with
disabilities (Best practice: refer
T4. Items/tasks are not only clear,
understandable, and differentiated, but
also draw upon or include multiple
references to culturally diverse contexts
student may write a poem, compose/sing a
song, or create a poster to demonstrate
mastery)
to SPED student IEPs when
designing the assessment)
*An assessment may, but is not required to, include a combination of: performance tasks with a rubric, and selected response items, such as multiple choice, matching
items, true/false items. When the assessment includes only performance tasks or selected response items, refer to the relevant indicator in T-1
34 | P a g e
Shaded criteria represent the minimum level required for assessment quality. This rubric was developed with district and teacher input during phase 1 of the 2015
Moderated Peer Review pilot. It is designed as a development tool to support teachers and should not be used for appraisal purposes. Originally based on the work of
Paul Bambrick-Santoyo in ‘Driven by Data: A Practical Guide to Improve Instruction’ [John Wiley, 2010]. | Last Updated: 07.27.15
APPENDIX 2: Appraiser-Approved Assessment Form
Appraiser Approved Assessment Form
Subject / Course
Teacher
Grade Level(s)
Appraiser
Instructions: The purpose of this form is to guide teachers and appraisers in determining the baseline requirements of an end-of-year
summative assessment. The minimum suggested score to meet HISD rigor and quality standards is 3. Criterion should be scored
individually. Appraisers may refer to the indicators for each criterion in the attached Assessment Review Rubric.
Teachers: Attach a copy of this review form to the Student Progress Appraisers: Using the rubric, review the assessment and
summative assessment (such as a final exam), performance task, or work verify that it meets the criteria in this review form. After
product you have identified or developed for the course/subject. Using reviewing the completed form with the teacher, approve the
the rubric, complete the Teacher portions and submit the assessment assessment as is, or give specific feedback and require the
and this review form to your appraiser.
teacher to resubmit it by the specified date.
Criterion
Evidence and Feedback
Appraiser
Alignment and Stretch Strand
A-1
Standards Alignment
A-2
Process Standards
A-3
Stretch
Meets standards = 3
1 2 3 4
Is the assessment aligned to the
course standards?
1
2
3 4
1 2 3 4
Does the assessment evaluate
process standards for the course?
1
2
3 4
1 2 3 4
Are low-end and high-end stretch
tasks/items assessed for the
course?
1
2
3 4
Rigor & Complexity Strand
R-1
Critical Thinking
R-2
Problem Solving
Meets standards = 3
1 2 3 4
Does the assessment evaluate the
students’ critical and higher-order
thinking abilities?
1 2 3 4
Does the assessment require the
student to demonstrate problem
solving abilities?
True Mastery Strand
T-1
Rubric / Selected
Response Quality
T-2
Length & Format
T-3
Clarity
T-4
Bias
35 | P a g e
Teacher
Refer to the rubric
1
2
3 4
1
2
3 4
Meets Standards = 3
1 2 3 4
Is there a rubric with indicators and
levels of mastery? Or, is there a
standards-aligned answer key?
1
2
3 4
1 2 3 4
Are length and format appropriate for
the subject and grade level?
1
2
3 4
1 2 3 4
Are the assessment’s language
and expectations clear and
understandable?
1
2
3 4
1 2 3 4
Does the assessment avoid biases
and is differentiated for ELLs and
students with disabilities?
1
2
3 4
Teacher Acknowledgement
The attached document is the summative assessment, performance task, or work product I plan to use for the TADS
Student Progress measure.
__________________________________________________________
Teacher Signature
________________________
Date
Appraiser Approval
I approve this assessment/performance task/work product as is.
I require revisions to this assessment on the criteria marked below, and resubmission by _____________________.
Teacher, please revise the following criteria in your submitted assessment || Appraiser, check all that apply:
Alignment & Stretch
__ A1 TEKS Alignment
__ A2 Process Standards
__ A3 Stretch
Rigor & Complexity
__ R1 Critical Thinking
__ R2 Problem Solving
True Mastery
__ T1 Rubric / Selected Response Quality
__ T2 Length & Format
__ T3 Clarity
__ T4 Bias
__________________________________________________________
Appraiser Signature
________________________
Date
Optional: Planned date of test administration, or completion of performance task/work product: __________________
Note: This form is designed to be used with a variety of assessments. Teachers may submit end-of-year summative
assessments that include but are not limited to: rubrics for performance tasks, essays or journals, exhibitions or
demonstrations, culminating end-of-year projects, student portfolios, or multiple-choice tests.
Last Updated: July 2015
36 | P a g e
APPENDIX 3: Bloom’s Taxonomy2
2
http://www.houstonisd.org/cms/lib2/TX01001591/Centricity/Domain/32256/Bloom_Taxonomy.pdf
37 | P a g e
APPENDIX 4: Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Wheel3
3
http://static.pdesas.org/content/documents/M1-Slide_19_DOK_Wheel_Slide.pdf
38 | P a g e
APPENDIX 5: Suggested Tools to Determine the Appropriateness of Reading Levels
When determining the appropriateness of reading levels, teachers may refer to the resource that best fits the
needs of their classroom. Some examples include, but are not limited to:
QUALITATIVE
Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures Rubric
(Available through the Council of Chief School
Officers site)
This rubric provides criteria to categorize literature
and informational texts into ‘very complex’,
‘moderately complex’, and ‘readily accessible’
categories
QUANTITATIVE
Lexile levels
Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) level
Reading A-Z levels
Accelerated Reader (AR) levels
Flesch-Kinkaid Reading Standard
Fry’s Readability Formula
External resources provided in this and other pages of the handbook are for reference purposes only and do not represent an
endorsement by HISD to any organization or methodology.
39 | P a g e
APPENDIX 6: Other Assessment Resources
General Assessment Resources
Assessment Design Toolkit
From the Center on Standards Assessment and
Implementation (WestEd and CRESST)
Description
<Recommended resource for assessment design>
Includes 13 modules with videos and supplemental
materials to help teachers write and select well-designed
assessments. It is divided into four sections:
(1) key concepts
(2) five elements of assessment design: alignment, rigor,
precision, bias, and scoring.
(3) writing and selecting assessments and
(4) reflecting on assessment design.
Best Practices for Creating Assessments
10 Tips for Assessing Project Based Learning
The modules address how to plan, write and select welldesigned assessments.
A PowerPoint describing best practices for creating
assessments, including information about reliability, validity
and writing test items.
Ten broad tips for assessments including links for the
individual tips.
Technology Enhanced Assessment Item Types
An assessment matrix and rubric describing different levels
of thinking required for various assessment item types.
(See pg. 21).
A description of various technology enhanced assessment
item types.
Sample Project Based Assessments
Six project based assessment samples. (Click on Released
Field Test Projects)
Cognitive Rigor Matrix for Mathematics
Examples of Authentic Assessment Tasks
Links to a large variety of authentic assessment tasks for
many different grade levels in many different content areas.
An in-depth description of formative assessment.
Tools and Strategies for Formative Assessments
Website Companion to Classroom Assessment by
Pearson
40 | P a g e
The online version of “Classroom Assessment” by Pearson,
providing links to a wide variety of assessment related
webpages.
At HISD, our goal is for every student to graduate ready for the world — possessing the
characteristics they need to be successful in college and to compete in today’s global
workforce. Our ability to develop global graduates is dependent upon our ability to
develop teachers and leaders with the skills they need to be effective. Outlined below are
profiles for the HISD graduate, teacher, and leader. Each contains a list of competencies.
Graduate
Leader
Responsible
Decision Maker
Adaptable &
Productive
Skilled
Communicator
College-Ready
Learner
Critical Thinker
Teacher
LEader
Deeper-Learning
Cultivator
Visionary
Social & Emotional
Learning Facilitator
Data
Driven
Data
Driven
Observation &
Feedback
Instructional
Planning
Lifelong
Learner
Personalized
Learning Architect
Literacy
Developer
Culture
Developer
Leadership
Teams Manager
It is the policy of the Houston Independent School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, color,
handicap or disability, ancestry, national origin, marital status, race, religion, sex, veteran status, political
affiliation, sexual orientation, and gender identity and/or gender expression in its educational
or employment programs and activities.