Scoring Tool for Evaluating Technology Standard IV:

Assessment for Administration and Instruction

Name: Date:

Course (if applicable):

Name of Instructor:

MTTS IV: This task provides evidence of the ability to use technology to analyze problems and develop data-driven solutions for instructional improvement. This task results in five scorable products: (1) Completed “(Your Last Name)_My Grade Book” spreadsheet with the individual and class averages, (2) “My Students’ Performance Graph,” (3) “My Sorted Grade Book,” (4) Written answers to Data Analysis, and (5) Written answers to Instructional Decisions. The scoring tool should be used by the instructor to evaluate each of the products holistically according to the “Look fors” and descriptive criteria for levels of performance on that product. All product-specific criteria presented in this scoring tool reflect the following generic scoring scale:

4 Exemplary: Demonstrates an in-depth and perceptive understanding; exhibits excellent evidence of attainment of concepts.

3 Proficient: Demonstrates a thorough understanding; exhibits clear evidence of attainment of concepts.

2 Developing: Demonstrates a partial understanding; exhibits some evidence of attainment of concepts.

1 Novice: Demonstrates a lack of understanding; exhibits minimal evidence of attainment of concepts.

The holistic score for each product should then be added (unweighted) to arrive at a total score.

The target performance of this standard specifies that students achieve:

· no product score below 3 and

· a total score of at least 15

It is recommended that the teacher candidate use the scoring tool as a self-assessment instrument before submitting the final products to the instructor.

Scoring Tool for Evaluating Technology Standard IV:

Assessment for Administration and Instruction

Name:

MTTS IV: This activity provides evidence of the ability to use technology to analyze problems and develop data-driven solutions for instructional improvement.

(Your Last Name)_My Grade Book Spreadsheet (including individual and class averages)	4 - Exemplary	3 – Proficient	2 - Developing	1 – Novice	CC*	Product Score
Look for: q Required information from the Maryland Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC). q Student and class averages calculated for each of the three objectives. Class average calculated for homework and attendance. Note: Candidate must report each average to one decimal place.	The three selected objectives are related, support the content area and can be measured quantitatively. All required information and data are included. All student averages and class average are calculated accurately.	The three selected objectives are related, support the content area and can be measured quantitatively. All required information and data are included. Most student averages and resultant class average are calculated accurately.	Two of the three selected objectives are related, support the content area and can be measured quantitatively. Most of the required information and data is included but some unclear and/or irrelevant information or data may be included as well. Only some student averages or resultant class average are calculated accurately.	The three selected objectives are not related, may not support the content area and/or cannot be measured quantitatively. Minimal required information and data is included, and other information and/or data included may be unclear or irrelevant. Student averages and/or class average are not calculated accurately or may be missing.
	Feedback:

NOTE: A teacher candidate must achieve a score of 3 or better for each of the five products for an overall rating of “Proficient” on Technology Standard IV.

* Condition Code: M=Missing; T=Off Topic/Off-Task; I-Illegible/Incomprehensible.

My Students’ Performance Graph	4 - Exemplary	3 - Proficient	2 - Developing	1 – Novice	CC*	Product Score
Look for: q Graph illustration of the average performance of each student on Objective 3. q Correct titles and labels on graph. q Appropriate selection of type of graph based on the data displayed.	Graph is complete, accurate and presented in a well-organized and consistently readable format to effectively facilitate comparison of student performance. Title and all labels are clear and appropriate. The type of graph selected is ideal for the data displayed.	Graph is complete, accurate, and presented in an organized and readable format to facilitate comparison of student performance. Title and most of the labels are clear and appropriate; no elements are missing. The type of graph selected is appropriate for the data displayed.	Graph is incomplete or presented in a format that does not effectively facilitate comparison of student performance. Title and most labels are unclear and/or inappropriate, or some elements are missing. The type of graph selected is of questionable appropriateness for the data displayed.	Graph does not display student performance data accurately or appropriately. Title and all labels are unclear and/or inappropriate or are missing. The type of graph selected is clearly inappropriate for the data displayed.
	Feedback:

My Sorted Grade Book	4 - Exemplary	3 - Proficient	2 - Developing	1 - Novice	CC*	Product Score
Look for: q Sorted averages on Objective 3 in descending order.	All required data are sorted accurately and displayed to consistently facilitate comparisons.	All required data are sorted accurately and displayed to generally facilitate comparisons.	Data are sorted accurately but may be incomplete and/or are displayed in a way that sometimes impedes comparisons.	Data are not sorted or are sorted inaccurately and/or are displayed in a way that prevents comparisons.
	Feedback:

NOTE: A teacher candidate must achieve a score of 3 or better for each of the five products for an overall rating of “Proficient” on Technology Standard IV.

* Condition Code: M=Missing; T=Off Topic/Off-Task; I-Illegible/Incomprehensible.

Data Analysis	4 - Exemplary	3 - Proficient	2 - Developing	1 – Novice	CC*	Product Score
Look for: q Description of how well the class met the three school goals for student performance. q Description of a pattern supported by data to identify the relationship among attendance, homework, and student performance on Goal/Objective 3. q Description of a pattern supported by data to identify the relationship between student performance on Goal/Objective 3 and information provided by “Additional Data” worksheet.	All descriptions are consistently accurate and complete. Identified patterns are consistently accurate and well supported by data.	Most descriptions are generally accurate and complete. Identified patterns are generally accurate and supported by data.	Some descriptions are incomplete or may contain inaccuracies. Identified patterns are often inaccurate and/or are inadequately supported by data.	Few or no descriptions are complete or accurate. Patterns are not identified or are identified incorrectly and are not supported by data.
	Feedback:

Instructional Decisions	4 - Exemplary	3 - Proficient	2 - Developing	1 - Novice	CC*	Product Score
Look for: q Identification and explanation of specific strategies to improve student performance based on identified pattern. q Identification of other needed adjustments in instructional strategies, supported by data findings. q Identification of useful additional student information and explanation of how it would be used to make instructional decisions.	Consistently appropriate strategies are identified, and explanations are consistently logical and well-supported by data . Other needed adjustments in instructional strategies are consistently plausible and well-supported by data. Explanation of additional student information needed is consistently thorough, realistic, and relevant to instructional decision-making.	Generally appropriate strategies are identified and explanations are generally logical and supported by data. Other needed adjustments in instructional strategies are generally plausible and generally supported by data. Explanation of additional student information needed is generally realistic and relevant to instructional decision-making.	Strategies are sometimes inappropriate or are not clearly identified and/or explanations may not be logical and/or supported by data. Other needed adjustments in instructional strategies are only sometimes plausible and/or are only partially supported by data. Explanation of additional student information needed is incomplete and/or sometimes unrealistic or irrelevant to instructional decision-making.	Strategies are missing or are inappropriate and/or not supported by data. Other needed adjustments in instructional strategies are missing or are implausible and/or not supported by data. Explanation of additional student information needed is missing, or is vague, unrealistic, or irrelevant to instructional decision-making.
	Feedback:
	TOTAL SCORE:____________

NOTE: A teacher candidate must achieve a score of 3 or better for each of the five products for an overall rating of “Proficient” on Technology Standard IV.

* Condition Code: M=Missing; T=Off Topic/Off-Task; I-Illegible/Incomprehensible