Lesson Assessment Rubric

The Lesson Assessment Rubric examines eight interrelated components for effective lesson development – concepts, learning objectives, tasks, learning strategies, classroom information management, assessment, resources/tools, and results/sharing. The rubric, which provides a continuum of progress, can be used by teachers as a pre-lesson guide or a post-lesson assessment.

Column one of the rubric gives the eight components of a lesson. The remaining four columns, with numbers 1, 2, 3, or 4, offer progressive descriptors for continuous improvement of a lesson. Each of the eight components can be given an individual number or the average of the eight components can be calculated.

Ohio SchoolNet Lesson Assessment Rubric

Components	1 No evidence	2 Some evidence	3 Evidence	4 Strong evidence
Concepts/ Concept Statement	•No evidence of concept statement(s) •Concept statement(s) do not relate to Ohio Proficiency Test outcomes (OPT) and/or the Ohio Competency Based Model (OCBM)	•Concept statement(s) demonstrates relationship to OPT outcomes and/or the OCBM	•Concept statement(s) clearly defines the focus of the lesson plan and the relation to OPT outcomes and/or the OCBM	•Concept statement(s) clearly defines the focus of the lesson plan and shows the inter-relationship among concepts and relation to OPT outcomes and/or the OCBM
Learning Objectives	•No evidence that learning objectives for the lesson are appropriate to the students	•Some evidence of appropriate learning objectives, but the objectives are not aligned with OPT outcomes and/or the OCBM	•Clearly articulates learning objectives for the lesson •Learning objectives and instructional procedures are relevant to students •Objectives are aligned with OPT outcomes and/or the OCBM	•Clearly articulates learning objectives that are developmentally appropriate •Objectives are aligned with OPT and/or the OCBM
Project/Tasks Overview	•Tasks do not enable students to demonstrate individual understanding of the concept or appropriate use of technology	•Student choice of technology tools and tasks is limited •Evidence of individual understanding of concepts is superficial •Tasks challenge lower ability students	•Engaging tasks provide opportunity for the use of one or more technology tools •Tasks challenge all student ability levels •Students have a choice of tasks to demonstrate their understanding of a given project or unit	•Engaging tasks provide opportunities to utilize multiple technology tools •Tasks can be adapted to work with all levels of technology •All students, regardless of abilities, are challenged and become self-directed •Encourages collaboration •Many choices of tasks to demonstrate student understanding of a given project or unit •Inspires extended learning – Kids want more

Ohio SchoolNet Lesson Assessment Rubric

Components	1 No evidence	2 Some evidence	3 Evidence	4 Strong evidence
Integration of Learning Strategies	•Direct or whole-group instruction dominates learning experiences •Individual needs of students not addressed •Collaboration not supported	•Limited diversity of learning strategies which does not enable all students to attain learning objectives	•Evidence of diverse learning strategies that meet the needs of students, enabling them to attain the learning objectives •Emphasis on opportunities for students to interact with/learn from one another	•Opportunities which extend beyond the classroom for students to interact and learn from one another at a local, state, or world level (formal & informal) •Flexible student grouping (pairs, triads, learning teams) •Teacher is facilitator, guide, co-learner •Use of cooperative group strategies •Learning experiences are appropriate to objectives, content, and developmentally appropriate •All students successfully meet diverse needs
Classroom and Information Management	•Expectations for student engagement in the learning process are not clearly defined •Information access is limited and dispensed primarily from teacher and text	•Expectations for student engagement in the learning process are set by the teacher •Multiple sources of information available, but access is highly structured by the teacher	•Expectations for student engagement in the learning process are clearly stated and developed collaboratively by teacher and students •Multiple sources of information available and student access is facilitated as needed	•Tasks related to the pursuit of learning set the behavioral expectations for the class •Strong underlying structures are established to enable students to be self-directed in selecting tasks and accessing resources in pursuit of learning objectives •Students develop new information •Strategies exist to have new information accessed by other students

Ohio SchoolNet Lesson Assessment Rubric

Components	1 No evidence	2 Some evidence	3 Evidence	4 Strong evidence
Assessment	•Not aligned with the lesson objectives •Assessment criteria are absent or not clearly articulated •Strategies employed are based on expediency	•Learning objectives are not all assessed •Assessment criteria exist, but approach does not communicate these to students •Strategies employed that nominally address the objectives of the lesson and the developmental level of the students	•Learning objectives of the lesson are clearly addressed •Clearly communicates the assessment criteria to the students •Employs strategies appropriate to objectives and the developmental level of the students	•Learning objectives of the lesson are clearly addressed •Clearly communicates the assessment criteria to the students •Evidence of student involvement in establishing the assessment criteria •Strategies appropriate to the objectives and developmental level of the students •Strategies have student feedback embedded
Tools and Resources Do and How	• No technology used	•One or more technology tools used, but no alignment with Technology Learner Profiles	• Technology tools from more than one area (Productivity, Information, HyperMedia, Networking) are clearly integrated and aligned with Technology Learner Profiles	• Multiple technology tools from multiple areas (Productivity, Information, HyperMedia, Networking) are clearly integrated and aligned with Technology Learner Profiles
Sharing Results	•Student products do not demonstrate a clear understanding of the concept(s) •Audience is limited to the teacher •Process does not promote teacher or student reflections about successful challenges of the lesson plan	•Audience for student products is limited to the classroom •Student products demonstrate marginal understanding of concept(s) •Teacher is reflective about his/her own work but doesn’t provide opportunities for students to do the same	•Audience for student products goes beyond the classroom •Student products demonstrate understanding of concept(s) •Students are guided to think critically about their work •Teacher is reflective about his /her own planning process – able to share insights with colleagues	•Audience for student products goes beyond the classroom. •Student products demonstrate understanding of concept(s) •Student work demonstrates critical thinking and problem solving •Audience participation provides information that facilities reflection on the teaching/learning process •Nature of the audience affects student design of product