1. Honors Level Course Rubric North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Curriculum & Instruction Division Dr. Maria Pitre-Martin, Director Linda Brannan, Student Support Services Consultant

2. Framework: Reasons for Change Revision needed in the Honors Level Course Rubric in order to inform and guide future changes to the current NCDPI Honors Level Course Implementation Guide as a result of the adoption of the new NC Standard Course of Study including the Common Core Standards and the NC Essential Standards Need for more rigor than standard level which is distinguished through the depth and scope of work required Developed as an integral component of the differentiated program of study for advanced learners

3. New Honors Level Rubric Outline Overview: definition of honors level courses; role definition; facility requirements; purpose of rubric, etc. Portfolio Sections Curriculum Content: How is the course adapted and differentiated for advanced learners? How does this curriculum support vertical alignment for college and career readiness? Instructional Materials: How is the course taught? Is there evidence of differentiation in instructional practices for advanced learners indicating complexity above the standard level course? Assessment: Is there evidence of authentic assessments and ongoing student self and peer assessment to adjust and improve learning? Scoring – Met/Not Met for each section with a Comments section Glossary of Terms – a living document to adjust as needed with continuous feedback from the LEAs

4. Development and Vetting Process Honors Level Course Rubric Team – included representatives from all curriculum areas Vetting included representatives from all curriculum areas through the various curriculum area email listserves, DPI Race to the Top Newsletter and Institutes of Higher Education over a two-week period of time Positive changes in the rubric occurred as a result of the vetting feedback

5. Timeline 2012-13 NCDPI Honors Level Course Implementation Guide developed with NCDPI offering professional development and support to the LEAs First random selection of participants 2013-14 Review process and supportive feedback from NCDPI to LEAs Second random selection of remaining LEAs/participants 2014-15 Review process and supportive feedback from NCDPI to LEAs Third random selection of remaining LEAs/participants 2015-2016 Review process and supportive feedback from NCDPI to LEAs