1. Global Neutral a
Global Warm Neutral
d3d1c8
Global Accent On Dark
ffbf00
Global Accent on Light
ff9800
Global Accent Alt
97c410
ELA - Coral
ff5147
Math
009f93
Leadership
7872bf
Using the EQuIP Rubric
(Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products)
Time: 2 mins
Speaker notes:
Transition from the IMET - we are looking more closely at the materials designed for instructional delivery through this process. In terms of usability, this is a document that you can use more regularly when you are building and evaluating lessons.
Grades 6-12

2. About Us
We are a team of former classroom teachers, curriculum writers, school leaders, and education experts who have worked in the private, public, and non-profit sectors. We are dedicated to teacher learning and teacher growth. We know that teaching is hard work and requires excellent training, high quality materials, and meaningful support for practitioners who are continuously striving to better serve their students. We provide educators with high-quality materials and hands-on professional development to help their students achieve the learning goals set by higher standards. We empower educators to make strong instructional decisions through immersive traning and access to free standards-aligned resources to adapt for their classrooms, schools, and districts.

3. Today’s Session Participants will…
Goals and Purpose
Participants will…
Develop a common understanding of the EQuIP quality review process
Develop a common understanding of the EQuIP Rubric including its criteria and rating scale
Practice using the EQuIP quality review process and rubric to evaluate and provide feedback on CCSS-aligned instructional materials
Time: 2 mins

4. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC EQuIP Quality Review: Principles & Agreements
Before beginning a review, all participants are familiar with the CCSS.
Inquiry: Emphasis is on inquiry and is organized around a set of guiding questions.
Criteria & Evidence: All observations, judgments, discussions, and recommendations are criterion and evidence-based.
Constructive: Lessons/units to be reviewed are seen as “works in progress.” Participants make constructive observations and suggestions based on evidence from the work.
Individual to Collective: Each member of a review team independently records his/her observations prior to discussion.
Understanding & Agreement: The goal of the process is to compare and eventually calibrate judgments to move toward agreement about quality with respect to the CCSS.
Time: 1 min
Speaker Notes:
Discuss that when groups are using the EQuIP, these are the principles and agreements they are expected to adhere to.
These are the protocols generally adopted by reviewers, and they are especially helpful when a group is looking at a lesson.
Again, from a point of advocacy and not assessment, using this tool can help in PD, can frame actual lesson and unit planning, and can support us as we fill in gaps in existing work.
Participants make constructive observations and suggestions based on evidence from the work.
Discussions focus on understanding all reviewers’ interpretations of the criteria and the evidence they have found.

5. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC A brief word about using tools…
Time: 30 seconds
Speaker Notes:
ANY tool is only  as useful as the person or people wielding it. This tool ( IMET/IPG/eQuip)  does provide a common framework and language for what aligned content is  (IMET, eQuip) and what aligned instructional delivery should be (IPG) and as such is an invaluable focus of PD.   Professional judgment  and rational thought should not exit the building when a tool enters the picture.  These tools are a huge asset to decision making and advocacy for good materials, but there are questions that may not be answerable by the tool or the process of using the tool.  These questions may only be answered by a deeper dive into the materials or asking targeted questions to the creators of the content/teacher delivering the education.
THIS IS A TOOL FOR DEVELOPMENT, NOT EVALUATION!!!!!!!

6. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC EQuIP Quality Review: Process & Dimensions
EQuIP Quality Review Process The EQuIP quality review process is a collegial process that centers on the use of criteria-based rubrics for ELA/literacy and mathematics. The criteria are organized into four dimensions. The Four Dimensions 1. Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS 2. Key Shifts in the CCSS 3. Instructional Supports 4. Assessment
Time: 1 min
Speaker Notes:
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.
Let’s take a deeper look.

7. I. Alignment to the Depth of the CCCSS II. Key Shifts in the CCSS
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC EQuIP Quality Review: Process & Dimensions
I. Alignment to the Depth of the CCCSS
II. Key Shifts in the CCSS
III. Instructional Supports
IV. Assessment
Time: 5 mins
Speaker notes:
Provide an overview of the columns - you are going to get into them in more depth in the next slides as to what they specifically say.
The next few slides are an overview as to how to use this document; we will get into actually using it - so this may see pretty fast, but the participants are going to come back to these questions and work closely with the rubric once we start evaluating a lesson.
Hand out copies of rubric

8. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC EQuIP Review Process
STEP 1: Review Materials STEP 2: Apply Criteria in Dimension I STEP 3: Apply Criteria in Dimension II – IV STEP 4: Apply an Overall Rating and Provide Summary Comments STEP 5: Determine Next Steps
Time: 1 min
Speaker Notes:
The five steps do not correlate to the five dimensions - we are going to take each step at a time, and then implement them with a lesson.

9. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC 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
Overview
A lesson with instructional notes and assessment opportunities
Checklists and rubrics
Student handouts
Model handouts
Read key materials related to instruction, assessment, and teacher guidance
Study and measure the text(s) that serves as the centerpiece for the lesson/unit, analyzing text complexity, quality, scope, and relationship to instruction
Time: 3 mins
Speaker Notes:
As we move through these steps, and discussion, think about how you evaluate lessons. How could this process enhance and focus review - and development - of materials?

10. Determine if the lesson/unit warrants a full review
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC 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
Compare observations and suggestions for improvement
Determine if the lesson/unit warrants a full review
Time: 3 mins
Speaker Notes:
Review, and focus on the last bullet - this is quality control. Not worth going any further if the first five bullets are not complete

11. Examine the lesson/unit through the “lens” of each criterion
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 3: Apply Criteria in Dimensions II-IV
Examine the lesson/unit through the “lens” of each criterion
Indicate each criterion met and record observations and feedback
When working in a group, individuals may choose to compare observations and suggestions for improvement after each dimension or wait until each person has rated and recorded all input for Dimensions II-IV.
Time: 3 mins
Speaker Notes:
Obviously step 3 takes a little longer and can be done several ways.

12. Individually write summary comments on the Quality Review Rubric PDF
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 4: Apply an Overall Rating and Provide Summary Comments
Individually review comments for Dimensions I–IV, adding/clarifying comments as needed
Individually write summary comments on the Quality Review Rubric PDF
When working in a group, individuals should record summary comments prior to conversation.
Time: 1 min
Speaker Notes:
Focus on why it is important to work individually first.

13. What communication and support will the developer receive?
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 5: Determine Next Steps for Your Learning Community
What additional practice is needed on the EQuIP Review Process and Rubric?
What communication and support will the developer receive?
What other ways can the EQuIP processes and materials influence and be incorporated into your practice?
Time: 1 min
Speaker Notes:
Discuss also what the next steps should NOT be - they should not be evaluating for teacher evaluation.

14. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Providing Feedback
Writing effective feedback is vital to the EQuIP Quality Review Process. Feedback should:
Be criteria-based: Written comments are based on the criteria used for review in each dimension.
Cite evidence: Examples are provided that cite where and how the criteria are met or not met.
Clarify where improvement is needed: When improvements are identified, specific information is provided about how and where such improvement should be added to the material.
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
Hand out and review EQUIP Feedback form.
No extraneous or personal comments are included.
Written comments suggest that the reviewer looked for evidence in the lesson or unit that address each criterion of a given dimension.
Not mentioned but assumed: Clarity Provided - written comments are constructed in a manner keeping with basic grammar, spelling, sentence structure, and conventions.

15. 3 Minutes – End of Song

16. Piecing it All Together
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
Give directions and pass out units or ask to download.
We are now going to separate by grades and groups. Grades 6-8 will work with Bud Not Buddy OR Steve Jobs, and Grades 9-12 will work with the Grade 9 Odell Unit.
Depending on number of 8th grade teachers, they can also use the grade 9 unit.
Depending on the room, feel free to give choice.
We are going to move through portions of this unit following the EQuIP rubric.
Note to facilitator: even if people have brought their own units, the benefits of doing this collectively will help calibrate them to jump into their own units with more skill and knowledge to accurately evaluate. So if people want to do their own, emphasize the benefit of doing collectively.

17. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Example: Grade 6, Lessons for Review
In this lesson, students read like a writer and analyze figurative language and the author’s word choice, meaning, and tone in Chapter 3 of Bud, Not Buddy. This is the second of the two-lesson cycle started in Lesson 6 that will be repeated until students have finished closely reading all of the Steve Jobs commencement speech. In this lesson, students dig deeper into paragraphs 6–8 in order to answer text-dependent questions.
Speaker Notes:
Explain that they should have two lessons from the unit to see how both fiction and nonfiction are addressed, and to get a better feel for the lessons, with the understanding that these are of course from a longer series of lessons.
Many of you might be familiar with this text—view these lessons/units for what is THERE, not what you assume is there

18. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Example: Secondary, Lessons for Review — ELA/Literacy
Speaker Notes:
Same here - these are taken from Odells unit on Making Evidence Based Claims for secondary instruction.
They are going to be evaluating Part 1 of this unit, pages 7-13, but should note the tools present if this were a longer review.

19. Does the lesson/unit align with the letter and spirit of the CCSS?
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 1: Review Materials Using Criteria for Dimension 1 – Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS
Does the lesson/unit align with the letter and spirit of the CCSS?
Targets a set of grade-level CCSS ELA/Literacy Standards
Includes a clear and explicit purpose for instruction
Select text(s) that measure within the grade-level text complexity band are are of sufficient quality and scope for the stated purpose (e.g.: presents vocabulary, syntax, text structures, levels of meaning/purpose, and other qualitative characteristics similar to exemplars in Appendices A & B)
Time: 20 mins
Speaker Notes:
“SNIFF TEST”
Review this and the following slide, and give participants 15 minutes or so to review and come to consensus as tables.
Briefly share out positive feedback and concerns before moving on to Step 2.

20. Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets.
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 2: Apply Criteria in Dimension I – Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS
Individually:
Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets.
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.
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 reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
Time: 15 mins
Speaker Notes:
Select the box for each criterion where there is clear and substantial evidence. Leave the box blank if there is insufficient or no evidence of a criterion.
Explain that criteria may be checked only if there is clear and substantial evidence of the criterion (there are no “half-checks”). There may be instances when reviewers find clear and substantial evidence of a criterion and constructive suggestions still can be made. In such cases, reviewers may provide feedback related to criteria that have been checked.
Each team member should engage in the criterion-based analysis of the example’s CCSS alignment individually (and silently) before any discussion occurs.

21. Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Share Out: Dimension Rating and Descriptive 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
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
Check tables for consensus, and if discussion is needed because there are drastic differences allow supporting evidence to be shared.
Next, moving on to Dimension 2.

22. The lesson/unit addresses key shifts in the CCSS:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS
The lesson/unit addresses key shifts in the CCSS:
Reading Text Closely: Makes reading text(s) closely (including read alouds) a central focus of instruction and includes regular opportunities for students to ask and answer text-dependent questions.
Text-Based Evidence: Facilitates rich text-based discussions and writing through specific, thought-provoking questions about common texts (including read alouds and, when applicable, illustrations, audio/video, and other media).
Academic Vocabulary: Focuses on explicitly building students’ academic vocabulary and concepts of syntax throughout instruction.
Time: 5 minutes for this and the next slide
Speaker Notes:
As reviewers apply the criteria in Dimension II, it may be helpful to ask the following questions regarding criteria 1-4:
For criterion 1: Is a text and the evidence contained within it the central focus of the lesson? Is it clear from the lesson that a majority of class time is to be spent reading, writing, or speaking directly about a text or texts? Are students being asked to read and reread (or listen to) the text, think deeply about it, participate in thoughtful discussions, and grapple with the particulars of the text?
For criterion 2-3: Is there a series of questions that require evidence from text that work together to facilitate rich conversations and writing? If these types of questions are present, reviewers should check the criteria. (Note: There may be instances when reviewers find clear and substantial evidence of this criterion and constructive suggestions can still be made. In such cases, reviewers may provide feedback related to criteria that have been checked.)

23. A unit or longer lesson should:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS
A unit or longer lesson should:
Grade-Level Reading: Include a progression of texts as students learn to read (e.g., additional phonic patterns are introduced, increasing sentence length). Provides text-centered learning that is sequenced, scaffolded, and supported to advance students toward independent grade-level reading.
Balance of Texts: Focus instruction equally on literary and informational texts as stipulated in the CCSS (p.5) and indicated by instructional time (may be more applicable across a year or several units).
Balance of Writing: Include prominent and varied writing opportunities for students that balance communicating thinking and answering questions with self-expression and exploration.
Time: 5 minutes for this and the previous slide.
Speaker Notes:
Extension of previous slide.

24. Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets.
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 3: Apply Criteria in Dimension II – Key Shifts
Individually:
Identify the grade-level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets.
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.
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 reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
Time: 20 mins
Speaker Notes:
Process repeated from Step 2
Select the box for each criterion where there is clear and substantial evidence. Leave the box blank if there is insufficient or no evidence of a criterion.
Explain that criteria may be checked only if there is clear and substantial evidence of the criterion (there are no “half-checks”). There may be instances when reviewers find clear and substantial evidence of a criterion and constructive suggestions still can be made. In such cases, reviewers may provide feedback related to criteria that have been checked.
Each team member should engage in the criterion-based analysis of the example’s CCSS alignment individually (and silently) before any discussion occurs.

25. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Share Out: Dimension Rating and Descriptive 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
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
Share out findings
Each team member should engage in the criterion-based analysis of the example’s CCSS alignment individually (and silently) before any discussion occurs.

26. The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension III: Instructional Supports
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
Cultivates student interest and engagement in reading, writing, and speaking about texts.
Addresses instructional expectations and is easy to understand and use.
Time: 5 minutes for this and next 2 slides total
Speaker Notes:
As reviewers apply the criteria in Dimension III, it may be helpful to ask the following questions:
For criterion 2: Does this set of materials address instructional expectations? Is it easy to understand and follow? Are the teacher resources (annotated responses, supports for ELLs, SPED, etc.) clear?
For criterion 3: Does this lesson/unit integrate targeted instruction in multiple areas such as grammar and syntax, writing strategies, discussion rules and aspects of foundational reading?

27. The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension III: Instructional Supports
The lesson/unit is responsive to varied student learning needs:
Focuses on sections of rich text(s) (including read alouds) that present the greatest challenge; provides discussion questions and other supports to promote student engagement, understanding, and progress toward independence.
Integrates appropriate supports in reading, writing, listening and speaking for students who are ELL, have disabilities, or read well below the grade level text band.
Provides extensions and/or more advanced text for students who read or write above the grade level text band.
Time: 5 minutes for this and both previous and subsequent slides
Speaker Notes:
As reviewers apply the criteria in Dimension III, it may be helpful to ask the following questions:
For criterion 6: Does this lesson/unit focus on sections of rich text(s) (including read alouds) that present the greatest challenge? Do discussion questions and other supports promote student engagement? Rich text(s) are texts that are worthy of rereading, include Tier 2 words, incorporate layers of meaning, and serve as mentor texts for writing. Challenging sections often require scaffolding for close reading.

28. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension III: Instructional Supports
A unit or longer lesson should:
Include a progression of learning where concepts and/or skills advance and deepen over time (may be more applicable across the year or several units).
Gradually remove supports, allowing students to demonstrate their independent capacities (may be more applicable across the year or several units).
Provide for authentic learning, application of literacy skills and/or student- directed inquiry, analysis, evaluation and/or reflection.
Integrate targeted instruction in such areas as grammar and conventions, writing strategies, discussion rules, and all aspects of foundational reading for grades 3–5.
Indicate how students are accountable for independent engaged reading based on student choice and interest to build stamina, confidence and motivation (may be more applicable across the year or several units).
Use technology and media to deepen learning and draw attention to evidence and texts as appropriate.
Time: 5 minutes for this and two previous slides

29. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 3: Apply Criteria in Dimension III – Instructional Supports
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/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 lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
Choose one piece of feedback for the group to share with entire room.
Time: 15 mins
Speaker Notes:
IMPORTANT NOTE:
During table work time, participants will also write one piece of specific feedback.
Reviewers should:
Select the box for each criterion where there is clear and substantial evidence. Leave the box blank if there is insufficient or no evidence of a criterion.
Explain that criteria may be checked only if there is clear and substantial evidence of the criterion (there are no “half-checks”). There may be instances when reviewers find clear and substantial evidence of a criterion and constructive suggestions still can be made. In such cases, reviewers may provide feedback related to criteria that have been checked.
Each team member should engage in the criterion-based analysis of the example’s CCSS alignment individually (and silently) before any discussion occurs.

30. Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Share Out: Dimension Rating and Descriptive 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
Time: 10 mins
Speaker Notes:
TIme to share out and evaluate calibration at the tables as well.

31. A unit or longer lesson should:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Criteria for Dimension IV: Assessment
The lesson/unit regularly assesses whether students are mastering standards-based content and skills:
Elicits direct, observable evidence of the degree to which a student can independently demonstrate foundational skills and targeted grade level literacy CCSS (e.g., reading, writing, speaking, and listening and/or language).
Assesses student proficiency using methods that are unbiased and accessible to all students.
Includes aligned rubrics or assessment guidelines that provide sufficient guidance for interpreting student performance and responding to areas where students are not yet meeting standards.
A unit or longer lesson should:
Use varied modes of assessment, including a range of pre-, formative, summative, and self-assessment measures.
Time: 3 minutes
Speaker Notes:
As reviewers apply the criteria for Dimension IV, it may be helpful to ask the following questions:
For criterion 2: Do students have multiple ways to show what they have learned?
For criterion 3: Do assessments produce a description of how close students have come to meeting expectations (e.g., annotated student work, descriptive rubrics/checklists)?

32. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Step 3 (continued): Apply Criteria in Dimension III – Assessment
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/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 lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
Choose one piece of feedback for the group to share with entire room.
Time: 10 mins
Speaker Notes:
Reviewers should:
Select the box for each criterion where there is clear and substantial evidence. Leave the box blank if there is insufficient or no evidence of a criterion.
Explain that criteria may be checked only if there is clear and substantial evidence of the criterion (there are no “half-checks”). There may be instances when reviewers find clear and substantial evidence of a criterion and constructive suggestions still can be made. In such cases, reviewers may provide feedback related to criteria that have been checked.
Each team member should engage in the criterion-based analysis of the example’s CCSS alignment individually (and silently) before any discussion occurs.

33. Rating Scale for Dimensions I–IV:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Share Out: Dimension Rating and Descriptive 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
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
n/a

34. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Overall Rating for the Lesson/Unit
E: Exemplar – Aligned and meets most to all of the criteria in Dimensions II, III, IV (11 – 12 points total) Aligned and exemplifies the quality standard and exemplifies most of the criteria across Dimensions II, III, IV of the rubric E/I: Exemplar if Improved – Aligned and needs some improvement in one or more dimensions (8-10 points total) Aligned and exemplifies the quality standard in some dimensions but will benefit from some revision in others R: Revision Needed – Aligned partially and needs significant revision in one or more dimensions (3-7 points total) Aligned partially and approaches the quality standard in some dimensions and needs significant revision in others N: Not Ready to Review – Not aligned and does not meet criteria (0 – 2 points total)
Time: 3 mins
Speaker Notes:
Also discuss how this this should never be used (evaluation purposes for an individual teacher lesson plan).

35. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Determining an Overall Rating
Go back through dimensions and add up total to initially determine the rating category.
Consider how your rating based on the total points matches your overall sense of the quality of the materials.
Consider if you have your judgments and feedback are placed within the appropriate dimensions.
Consider how your dimensional feedback supports your judgments.
Consider if the lesson falls in the category you feel is appropriate.
Time: 10 mins
Speaker Notes:
Ask participants to move through this process individually and assign a rating. Provide individuals 10 minutes for this. At the conclusion of 10 minutes (or when it looks like they are done and have begun talking to each other), shift to asking for group consensus to share out (another 5 minutes). But before we share out, move onto the following slide, because that will ask participants to develop summary comments so the share outs can be succinct.

36. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Developing Summary Comments
Strong summary comments:
Highlight the strongest aspects of the unit
Succinctly summarize key areas for improvement articulated in the dimensional comments
Time: 5 mins
Speaker Notes:
Explain to reviewers that the summary comments should highlight the most critical issues that have emerged over the course of the review. Summary comments should acknowledge what the developer has done well, identify the criteria that were not checked, and provide suggestions for improving the alignment and quality of instructional materials

37. Compare overall ratings and synthesize feedback:
SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC 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 are the next steps for this material?
Time: 10 mins
Speaker Notes:
Share out.
Next steps for the materials: have teams compare their overall ratings and come to agreement then determine what the next steps for the materials ought to be.

38. SESSION 3: USING THE EQuIP RUBRIC Reference List
Slide

39. Check your email for a feedback survey link or submit online via our website.